When you present something you need to know your audience even if you are going to speak the truth and nothing but the truth, since not everyone will have the same knowledge to get what you are really saying. There is a reason why today there is so much specialization, since no one can know everything (not even close). If you are going to explain the details of how light is both particle and wave at the same time the person without proper education will think you are crazy (at best). The same can be said about climate change, explaining that to the person that doesn't have much knowledge in Chemistry and/or Geography can be a real rhetorical challenge. In a way the question of can this topic really be presented in the form that fits everyone is highly questionable, especially since you can't really present the the topic of this scale in info and research in the form that fits the everyday life (there is just too much info and combinations). So you must be careful with what you are presenting so that you don't make holes in logic or rhetoric that can be exploited. Plus there is a question of everyone fitting the same standard, what suggests that you should have a version for average Joe, version for business people, version for scientists, version for kids ... etc. You don't have to say a single factual lie in all of the versions but the style of presentation can really make a difference with every group. In a way with climate change we got stuck exactly because the rhetoric was too emotional and imprecise for the scale of change that is required to turn this around, since the presentation was done by wrong people, with wrong presentation strategy and perhaps even with wrong social desires/goals. So striking that one down wasn't that much of a challenge.
Therefore if you don't find the idea of use/interest that may simply be because it was presented to you in a wrong way.