Challenged by uncritical feelings and decades of environmental data and dogma leading to a rigorously vetted consensus being dismissed because of boilerplate observations?
I was a hardcore hockey player when I was younger, a lot of that hockey played on outdoor ice rinks and I've noticed the so-called season shortened slightly over time - the ice used to be maintained from the end of December to the beginning of March (has to be -5C/23F or colder) and it now tends to end by the end of February. An argument can be made about the municipal governments cutting back funding or changing certain criteria, but it's clear to me the weather over the last 10-15 years has generally produced less than desirable results for the outdoor ice hockey crowd.
Likewise, a fair amount of homes built right by the water's edge are now in what the province designates as flood zones, cutting down on work permits for construction and insurance claims. I've seen the various effects of climate change first-hand.
That said, I refuse to buy into the alarmist claims coming from public figures like Greta Thunberg and politicians that are using changes occurring in our environment to propose large scale policies that risk doing far more harm to us than the slowly changing climate and everything that brings with it. It's in their best interest to tackle the issue reasonably because when they start using hyperbolic language like some of their peers in years/decades past it becomes very easy to dismiss them. The world isn't ending in 11 years like AOC initially claimed, nor is that a period of no return as others have said, including experts.
Our species has come a very long way since the last ice age and has been examining the idea of creating colonies on the moon and even Mars. I think that even given some of the worst case scenarios today's scientists are throwing around our kids and their kids and their kids after them will be more than fine in a 100 years. Again, that's not to say we shouldn't do anything between now and then - we're already on a path that has us doing a great deal - but it's in everyone's best interest to enter the discussion with reason rather than emotional pleas based on extreme views, like Greta Thunberg and AOC.