I fully agree with you. Our planet runs on some large and small cycles, time-wise, as far as climate, and some of these cycles are hard enough to deal with without us adding to the game by warming the place up. Our sun also has periodic cycles, some short, and some long, which affect climate on Earth, and especially when certain sun cycles coincide with certain planetary climate cycles.
Unfortunately, no matter what we do, these cycles will persist. There are scientists on both side of the fence when it comes to climate change. Those that understand the many natural cycles in the Earth's climate, along with the many cycles in our sun that also affect climate on Earth, are hesitant to point the finger at human activity as the current cause of large-scale climate change. And then there are those that point to the fact that human activity has a measurable impact on climate, and that our contribution is certainly enough to at least aggravate some natural cycles in the weather, and that we need to do something about it before it's too late.
But because there is this divide, politicians can pick and choose the science people they want, who will express the views they want to hear. This is not due to corrupt science, or corrupt scientists; it is due to two ways of looking at the same problems. There is no definitive answer as yet. But because human activity does contribute measurably to heat retention within the atmosphere, we should at least err on the side of caution and play it safe. That we cannot come to an agreement on this is due to greed on the part of some, and disdain for the problems that future generations may be required to deal with. It's unconscionable conduct, but what in politics these days is not?