I reject this sentiment. Ask anyone that you know who lived through the 1960s in a rich country. Their experience is nearly all the same: The air quality and environmental pollution was appalling. When my mother lived in Manhattan (New York City) in the 1960s, she would return home from work, and wipe her face with a cloth. The cloth had black streaks from all the pollution. Today, it is a different world in rich countries. They have cleaned up.
Finally: Yes, global warming is real, but the threat is different. I predict that we will far exceed the average increase in global average temperature, but we will survive. Yes, we will survive, but with some "scars".
The air in Manhattan got better because people rejected resignation and demanded that we must do better.
By "scars" you mean the permanent destruction of coral reefs, old-growth forests, and the species that depend on them? These cannot be rebuilt on any timescale meaningful to civilization. What exactly are you defending?
We have done a lot better with faster and readily perceptible environmental problems.. from air pollution in China to acid rain killing forests and lakes in Europe. So yes, we should celebrate our successes too.
One of the objectives of the Artemis missions is to prepare for Mars travel, none of the objectives of Artemis are to view Earth as the only planet we have nor to preserve it.
Proving the Earth is flat is not one of the stated goals of the Artemis program which is to establish a permanent base on the moon to prepare for deep space exploration.
