I think climate change has existed during the evolution of the planet. The perspective we have about it it's a bit modified by mass media and turns the real meaning of it. To sum up, there isn't a relationship between the perspective and the climate change itself because one it's a recreation and the other is something real before Mankind existed on Earth.
Of course, lack of precaution and denying human impact on the environment cause conflicts in problem solving and accelerates climate change. The divided perception of climate change in the US (please find my study below) is a great area for politicians for differentiation. Also, that the climate change became the area of political debates erodes international efforts to improve the future perspective.
People in the US have been living in coastal areas, and their land is disappearing by the increasing see level, deny climate change. It is such a biased perception based on a political commitment and faith what you cannot understand by a healthy mind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY-HOYTz-rs
It had been ridiculous if Trump did not pull out of the Paris agreement.
Yes, the perceived climate change has a great influence on climate change.
Article Public perception of bioenergy in North Carolina and Tennessee
Climatic conditions affect human well-being both directly, through the physical effects of climatic extremes, and indirectly, through influences on the levels of pollution in the air, on the agricultural, marine and freshwater systems that provide food and water, and on the vectors and pathogens that cause infectious diseases. Change in world climate would influence the functioning of many ecosystems and the biological health of plants and creatures. Likewise, there would be health impacts on human populations, some of which would be beneficial. For example, milder winters would reduce the seasonal winter-time peak in deaths that occurs in temperate countries, while in currently hot regions a further increase in temperatures might reduce the viability of disease-transmitting mosquito populations.
The climate change debate, as it discussed in the mainstream media, appears to be divided into two major sides. One side argues that the current global warming is caused by human factors while the other side insists it is occurring because of natural forces. In the latter argument, two natural causes that dominate the conversation are solar changes and changes to the Earth's orbit...
I do think that humanity can contribute to its future and perspective by proper doings, regarding climate change.
Anything dealing with climate change is bound to provoke an argument. And our story on Berkeley physicist Richard Muller’s recent conversion to a believer in man-made global warming, which he made in an op-ed in the New York Times, certainly stirred the pot. In addition to preparing a video story on the PBS NewsHour, I had written a blog that included extended remarks from Anthony Watts, a well-known blogger and prominent voice in the skeptic community. Watts — a former California TV weatherman who runs a company that provides weather data to TV stations — says he doesn’t completely discount global warming, but he says that much of the data recording temperatures are flawed because the stations are in areas like urban settings which retain heat and therefore read too high.
Many people have a wrong perspective on climate change -on what it is, and what its consequences could be. Others even equate it to climate variation. While the later is a natural phenomenon, the former is not. Why should we remain in denial when our actions are driving us into an unsustainable world? While it is true that climate may affect human behavior, the converse is also true. In fact it is even more pronounced that human behavior affect climate. More significantly even. The cyclic events of floods, hurricanes etc that have become a common feature are indicators of the climate change problem. Consequently, as a reply to your answer, climate change affects both our behavior and perspective as long as we remain in denial about the phenomena.
« Paris Agreement marks the opening of a new stage of humanization of climate change. For the first time in a climate agreement, and in one of the first international agreements on the environment, explicit mention is made of states' human rights obligations. While the climate regime has been mainly built on environmental and economic aspects, from now on the apprehension of social and cultural issues is certain, particularly in the light of a human rights-based approach. The environmental issue of global warming has and will have negative effects on the enjoyment of human rights. The international obligations relating to the latter contribute to the development of a climate regime which places the human being (and humanity) at the heart of the preoccupations» (Perspectives d’humanisation des changements climatiques : Reflexions autour de L’accord de Paris by Camila PERRUSO in Droits fondamentaux, n° 14, janvier 2016 – décembre 2016).