This is an immensely complex topic and you make some valid points, though some may complain that this line of reasoning is shading into “climate change denial.”
The overall point here is, basically, that “the climate has been changing for billions of years.” (And, as a corollary, without the input of humans.) Yes, that’s true as far as it goes. What this observation may not account for is that previous shifts in the earth’s climate have brought about wrenching changes, extinctions, dramatic evolutions in flora and fauna, and that’s sobering when you consider the fate of 7+ billion current human inhabitants of earth, and billions more of our descendants. An honest accounting of how prior climatic shifts have upended life on earth should give us pause as we consider what we’re doing to the earth today. I would say that humanity is resourceful and well-positioned to survive almost anything, even a crisis much more acute like a nuclear war or meteor strike (or, as dramatized in “The Last of Us,” an über-pandemic), but not without an immense death toll and unfathomable suffering and a greatly diminished existence for those remaining.
Can we explain exactly how and how much the climate is changing? Can we create an infallible scientific model that will chart exactly where we’re going in the coming decades? No, we can’t. Not least because any such comprehensive model would depend upon variables that are themselves impossible to predict (including both “known unknowns” like the outcomes of future elections, decisions of future governments, changes in consumer habits and tastes, the rate of scientific progress on decarbonizing various industries, as well as “unknown unknowns” which are… well, unknown.)
What we do know is that the greenhouse effect exists (it’s the reason why earth is “warm” and teeming with life and the moon, at an equal distance from the sun, is “cold” and barren), and putting more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere equates to more warming. That is the basic overall gist of what climate science tells us that can’t be questioned and isn’t subject to reasonable debate. It’s so easy a third grader can understand it, and indeed, these concepts are introduced in the third grade. Though query whether the carbon cycle is at risk of being deemed “woke science” by a certain political party and jettisoned from the curriculum in RW-SJW states like Florida.