The train analogy reveals the bad mental model. Thinking we cannot apply a counterforce to the "train" only comes from assuming it's too hard to do so. If we had infinite technological capabilities, we could remove all the excess carbon from the atmosphere relatively quickly. There's nothing, based on physics, preventing this possibility. That doesn't mean it's easy or knowable how it can be done, only that it could be done given sufficient technological means. Which we'll surely be incentivized to develop vs just sitting around and waiting for nature to take its course.
Go back and read predictions about the future from a century ago that failed to imagine simple things we take for granted today like telecomms or high speed travel. They're hilarious in grasping with bad analogies to come to strong conclusions like this. This doesn't mean the person is wrong, just that we ought to not take their beliefs as being factual, particularly if we can identify they've failed to try to incorporate technological breakouts grounded in known physics and our expected collective incentives.
Go back and read predictions about the future from a century ago that failed to imagine simple things we take for granted today like telecomms or high speed travel. They're hilarious in grasping with bad analogies to come to strong conclusions like this. This doesn't mean the person is wrong, just that we ought to not take their beliefs as being factual, particularly if we can identify they've failed to try to incorporate technological breakouts grounded in known physics and our expected collective incentives.