The risk of something that may or may not happen 100 years in the future, and even if it does, may be rendered moot by future technology .... is difficult to get people to worry about.
However, "Rosina Bierbaum, a University of Michigan environmental policy scientist" and "other academics like Michael Oppenheimer, a climate scientist at Princeton University." have a very real, immediate risk. Namely, that people might catch on to their scam, and they'll need to start actually working for a living, rather than living off government (read: taxpayer-funded) grants. So, they're required to get more and more hyperbolic, as fewer people become interested in their cause du jour.
If people were presented the risk in that context, I'd think that funding would dry up quickly.
Just ask the scientists what is their plan to fix it, how much will it cost and what is the mitigation plan in case they are wrong?
Without those answers, there is no longer a point to fund them. They had enough time to figure it out.