“and a pity that we’re relying on school children, rather than stepping forward ourselves”
Always a problem with playing this card.
Usually means rational argument has failed.

“I partly agree with the general suggestions that climate scientists shouldn’t be seen as having the superior expertise”.
It is the nexus between the scientist and his expertise versus the committed activist who may well be a scientist, but in seeking activism damages his cause.
This is not a comment against taking action and being committed to it, It is a comment against taking action without questioning the facts along the way.
There is a big difference, a gap in credibility and the public see this.

There is a difference between a message,
” the real message that climate crisis cannot be taken lightly,”
and scaring people to death
” and is urgently and ultimately a most horrifying question of life and death.”

We live in a world of scams and fake news. Every headline exaggerates and scares people. The scarier it is the less likely it is to be true. Angech’s law, though I am sure it is a lot older than today.
Urgently, ultimately, a matter of life and death and my favourite, unprecedented. When Joe Public sees this attitude and these words he knows he is being taken for a ride.

As I see it, no disrespect intended, nearly everyone who comments here is an activist first, even if only by a whisker and a scientist second.
Does anyone value stepping back a little and taking a more measured approach to the issues?
Bringing out their inner scientist.
“Looking at the Sun” is the title of a book by an American Psychologist describing our hidden fears of death. Perhaps a read of it would give some insight into why motivating people through fear is a bad though powerful argument,