Is Mentioning the 'Source' of Our Climate Problem a Really Big Deal?

The need to 'transition from fossil fuels' was finally admitted at Cop28. The first time, coal; oil and gas have featured in a Cop communique! There's a mixed responses to this 'new' position. The Cop28 President (alias the UAE's oil minister), has lauded the 'success' of the 'parties' (the official delegates) (https://sharjah24.ae/en/Articles/2023/12/14/Al-Jaber-lauds-success-in-delivering-response-to-Global-Stocktake). He claimed they had 'confronted realities' and given the world 'a robust plan to keep 1.5 within reach'. The President also maintained 'It is a plan that is led by the science' (now, where have we heard that before?). I'm not sure that many climate scientists would agree with his profoundly relaxed position. Asad Rehman, for one, is much less enthusiastic about Cop28's outcome (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/13/rich-countries-cop28-fossil-fuel-phase-out-climate-justice). Rehmen thinks the rich countries are desperate to convince us their 'hollow Cop28 deal is a triumph'. He maintains that there's zero truth in the claim that rich countries (who caused and are rapidly exacerbating the problem) care about climate change, whilst it's the developing countries who lack 'ambition' to do the right thing. Perhaps fossil fuels are not the real cause of climate change? The addiction to fabulous profits of people and companies seems a more likely culprit. Many such folk are long-term addicts, who will find it very difficult to kick their habit! Politicians generally facilitate them.