No, it is a realistic approach to a problem which has been facing many places elsewhere in the world where it has been solved using engineering. It is far more apt to call climate doom predictions statements of religious faith given the history of engineering solutions to climate-related problems and the close resemblance of climate doom preachers to those deriving their prophecies from scripture.

Here's a few books on the subject which might be of interest for those who want to widen their view on the ever-changing climate. All of them have in common that they do not deny the climate is changing nor that human activities influence how it changes. Where they differ from the doom narrative is that they approach climate change in the way humans have dealt with other environmental problems to lessen or negate their impact instead of by preaching some grand narrative on how society should be run to avoid catastrophe.

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All by Michael Shellenberger

https://www.amazon.com/Apocalypse-Never-Environmental-Alarmi...

False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet by Bjorn Lomborg

https://www.amazon.com/False-Alarm-Climate-Change-Trillions/...

Unsettled (Updated and Expanded Edition): What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters by Steven E. Koonin

https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Updated-Expanded-Climate-Sc...

https://www.amazon.com/Apocalypse-Never-Environmental-Alarmi...

> You're quoting the outputs of a propaganda industry, not the outputs of credible independent research.

One man's propaganda is another man's truth, and vice versa. Do you really think the EPI is credible? https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/economic-policy-in...

> These are the orgs who persistently try to sell trickle-down economics

That's ironic, given that the phrase "trickle-down" was invented by leftists as a marketing tactic: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/thomas-sowell-on-the-trickle-...

> low regulation

Well, we can agree on that one at least.

> and other discredited, disastrous, and irrational neoliberal policy argument

Never mind. I guess we have nothing to agree on.

> Many are also enthusiastic climate change denialists.

You're clearly influenced by the outputs of a propaganda industry, not the outputs of credible independent research. See what I did there? I'll even one-up you with some links:

https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Climate-Science-Doesnt-Matt...

https://www.amazon.com/Apocalypse-Never-Environmental-Alarmi...

https://www.amazon.com/Fossil-Future-Flourishing-Requires-Ga...

To balance that out with some constructive environmentalism, try this book next;

https://www.amazon.com/Apocalypse-Never-Environmental-Alarmi...