I agree with what you're saying, but it's important to differentiate climate change and anthropogenic climate change, or climate change that's the result of human influence. The one thing that we can say about our climate is that it is always changing. Our planet has gone through warm periods and ice ages, and will do so again. The very presence of icecaps was uncommon for most of our planet's existence. Current trends seem to indicate that reduced solar activity will be sending us into another cold period.
On small scales, we can observe scenarios where human activity has affected the local climate. Most notably situations where deforestation has dramatically changed the local ecosystem, in turn affecting the average humidity levels in the local air and leading to the shrinkage of nearby glaciers not due to excessive melting but instead due to an reduction in precipitation that would normally replenish the ice.
But when it comes to large scale global influence of the climate, I am thoroughly unconvinced that humanity is a driving force. I'm confident that the sun is the most prominent driving source since it is the origin of almost all of the energy that enters our climate system.
I'm all for protecting the environment, but 99% of "climate saving" plans are ludicrously expensive and by their own admission would do fuck-all to counteract their expected catastrophes. They're just excuses to virtue signal, lower the quality of life in the civilized world, and redistribute wealth via carbon shekels.
Fuck yes for nuclear power. In its current state is is by far our cleanest and safest power source on the planet. Daily reminder that wind and solar are far deadlier than nuclear per gigawatt hour even with the most ludicrously high estimates of Chernobyl. We can make it cleaner and safer if idiots would stop standing in its way.