@ibstubro while I agree with the gist of your post, I feel you do a dis-service when using the term “end”. Using the term end implies that there is a specific target or goal that can and should be reached and that if we can just get to it we can change everything back to “normal”. There is no end, just a maximum point where there is a reversal and the Earths climate begins to cool down again. What the maximum is and when it occurs are variables that we can, probably, influence technologically. We cannot stop the climate from warming up, the best we can do is limit its extent and make societal adjustments to compensate for the change.
You stated that “The pollution that was killing waterways and vast swaths of wildlife in the US in the 1970’s was slowed, and gradually reversed. There’s still much to be done, but we’re headed in the right direction.” You know, this occurred because, under the free market system, the businesses developed a social conscience and, damn the cost, made the adjustments for a better world not because the people, using their combined power in the form of “government” stepped in and instigated laws and regulations that curtailed the environmentally detrimental activities of the polluters. The same thing will happen to help curtail global warming. The people do not need to get involved.