Are your lifestyle changes draconian, or your advocacy of better lifestyles in general, or just your discussion of expected consequences with, maybe a doomer slant?
My "draconian" lifestyle consists of not flying, not driving a car (actually, I can't drive), and being vegetarian. Being vegetarian still gets me funny comments on occasion, though it's far more acceptable because plenty of people are vegetarian these days for religious reasons. Not flying is what gets to people the most. What people seem to have real trouble with, is the fact that I'm not posing or signalling belonging to any particular tribe, but just acting in accordance to what I believe is likely to happen in the future.
People are very comfortable with others talking about things like climate change much like they talk about their religion or belonging to their political party: it's all talk. We all know that in actual fact, it's extremely rare to meet the Christian that genuinely believes he or she will go to heaven after they die, because they don't approach dying people with specific messages to give to relatives when they meet them in heaven or any such things, the way you do when a person is travelling to an actual place that exists. And in the same way, it often happens that political activists will happily behave in ways that contradict the supposed beliefs of their political party, because it's all for show. It can really freak people out when somebody really behaves as if certain things are true.
I don't generally go preaching, because if even the supposedly "green" people I know can give plenty of excuses for flying, what's the point in trying to convince anyone else? And I don't go pressuring green people not to fly, I just make a comment when they say they've just flown somewhere along the lines of: "That isn't supposed to be very good for climate change," in a disappointed tone. Which is guaranteed to make them as defensive as you've ever seen them. The problem is, I make them realise I'm more serious about it than they are, and they can't handle it.
As for talking about expected consequences, I've returned for long enough to this forum for you to notice how much I talk about expected consequences, even in a forum about energy issues. If people are not interested in a topic, I'm not going to bother to talk about it. And I don't go for the catastrophic doom, I go for trying to find out what is a realistic worst case scenario. And then I encounter people like you that refuse to accept that even a mildly bad scenario is even possible. Well, if you don't want to hear it, you won't. It isn't necessary to talk about things to survive them. I'll just shut up and adjust my calculations to include some scenarios even more negative than the previous ones.
Actually, maybe that's the problem. Maybe I should have gone on and on and on incessantly to everyone I know, on the grounds that repetition and brainwashing works. Not let other people set the agenda of the conversation, but let them know that I'm far more important than they are, and my opinions are what count, and I pick the subject. Problem is, it's a difficult trick to pull for a foreigner.