It's hard to get to the truth because there's irrational hysteria on both sides.

A lot of the arguments against the warming are 'flat earth' where they grasp at straws to justify their belief, and they sound reasonable to a layman except with flat earth you can look at pictures of the earth and see it's nonsense. On the other hand, climate scientists seem to be in a Covid-like 10x worse than it is hysteria where they'll get fired and lose their funding for questioning the party line and then media hypes that into 100x worse.

Personally I judge these things by comparing risk. The scientists and people in charge clearly do not believe it's a major problem or they'd be strongly behind using geoengineering to control climate. There are known methods that quickly extract massive amounts of CO2 (like iron seeding), simulate volcanoes, and so on but each with some seemingly small risk to them.

So these people who study climate as their day job believe the risk from growing CO2 is less than the risk of these geoengineering solutions.