As for your other points:

1. That climate change is made by man.

Only in the sense that people like Mann faked things like the “hockey stick” graph. More seriously, there is certainly some evidence that man may have something to do with climate change but the mechanism for such effect and its magnitude are not at all well understood.

2. “That temperatures will rise further”

That is certainly possible. Solar output is on the upswing, there are long cycles in temperature which are not well understood but may cause temperature to rise. Conversely, there are lots of indications that temperature will continue its current trend downward. And you would do well to look at how the general idea that temperature is rising has arisen. Fair number of biased data manipulations and extrapolations – I would be very cautious in asserting much about the trend and magnitude of global temerature change.

3. “that the climate change will have bad consequences”

Possibly. Or it may be benign or insignificant. Warmer winters reduce death rates from cold. Longer growing seasons can increase food yields.

4. “that it is possible for governments and individuals to do something about it.”

Not really. Or at least cost effectively. If climate change is not entirely man made – as I believe the science is beginning to show – then obviously there is not a lot gov’t or individuals can do about it. Can’t turn down the Sun.

But even if a portion is man made the question is what the trade offs are. What is avoiding a 40cm sea level rise worth? What is avoiding a degree temperature rise over the next century worth? Is it worth killing literally millions of children who are alive today and might be alive tomorrow if we spend our money on malaria nets rather than carbon sequestration?

Plus, and sorry to burst your bubble, at the rate China and India are industrializing – mainly using coal fired electricity to do so – any savings the West might make will be overwhelmed more or less before they are made.