I also appreciate the point that you are making ... it has a lot of scientific merit.
My thinking has shifted towards pragmatism. The umbrella argument of climate change hovers over a range of solutions that just happen to be environmental. I can see the climate change debate as a convenient rally cry to get environmental initiatives from boardroom and cabinet discussions to implementation.
Without the climate change debate, smaller interest groups have to argue for cleaner rivers, or air or cities and other groups have to argue for less energy consumption and yet others have an agenda for simpler less consumption orientated lives ... with the climate change debate, there appears to be an aggregation of environmental solutions and considerations and more co-ordinated discussions.
