Keeping people cool during weather agitated by climate change

Mi (original post--names are shortened for confidentiality):

global warming my ass

Mar:

talk to the astronomy professor at UMD... the man is totally against this global warming nonsense. and yeah, that wind's a blowin out there

Me (Ian):

Hate to be that guy but I learned too much science to let this slide by:
Mar, most academic astronomers are theoretical physicists. They deal with mathematical models and rarely deal with real-life long-term biological and atmospheric systems (climate is not the same as weather--weather is a short-term occurrence). What people worry about is severe weather agitated by climate change and our possible effect on accelerating it. Any causal arguments about climate change that beguile people to say "it's not true" or "it's part of a natural cycle" don't hold muster to those literate with basic atmospheric science. For those seriously engaged in the atmospheric/environmental scientific and economic communities, the most important concern comes from the ethical consequences of inaction. New York city had 10,000 911 calls per hour last night, ten times above its average. People live in areas that are unprepared for severe weather. There are at least 16 deaths [edit Nov. 1st 2012: during Hurricane Sandy. {death toll in the U.S. and Canada as of today is 82, don't forget places in the Caribbean like Haiti got hit too, with approximately 71 deaths there.}], and this incident certainly will put a dent in coastal economies that weren't ready to deal with the damage.
For common [climate skeptic] arguments refuted with good research:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

In some way, many people realize that the severity of the weather--and thereby, the death toll--can be mitigated or reduced through our actions, even those that can contribute to likelihood of future events like the weather.

I posted the above dialog because it lists what I think it takes to responsibly and civilly respond to a situation like this.

I think what most people involved with climate change advocacy really work on and worry about severe weather agitated by climate change.  I don't mind if a person's liberal or conservative, I believe our political choices are fundamentally motivated by a desire to live well--if not for ourselves, than for future generations (my father says he wants to vote for a candidate whom I disagree with because he thinks it's important for my future).

Could a responsible conservative who recognizes the national debt and deficit being on an unsustainable course justify financial apathy?  The same principle idea applies to environmental conservativism.  What I don't appreciate about most global warming/heating/climate change advocacy is that many people tend to articulate it in ways that disempower people, and in that capacity, distracts people from connected tangible and real issues of public health, environmental justice, and the problems that arise when considering the economics in context with the science and ethics (read here for an example).  Furthermore, many advocate from a position that bolsters defensiveness and entrenchment when education and compassion are most needed.

While brandishing sticks might be a valuable tool in policy, when it comes to interacting with conscientious people whom you rub elbows with in the community, I think the greatest privilege one can have, and the greatest respect one can extend to another, is through education that respects their own autonomy as individuals.  To my pleasant surprise, the reply from Mar was positive (liked it) and appreciative (Thanks for the comment!).