This is conflating advocacy for behaviour change and enacting policies to get it to happen. We haven't tried, crazily enough, reducing flying or meat eating wit

This is conflating advocacy for behaviour change and enacting policies to get it to happen. We haven't tried, crazily enough, reducing flying or meat eating with policy actions, for example. (edit: Ok, EU and some non eu countries just recently included flying in ETS, that's a little start.) We absolutely need behaviour change, excluding that would be a mega (giga?) death scale error in judgement. And we also need to move on all fronts, and can't afford to attack the biggest emission sources one by one serially (such as addressing coal plants first and transport after that). I think that's just obvious and this argument often seems like whataboutist rhetorical tactic.