Allow me to cite a few examples. First of all, those who affirm the reality of global climate change sometimes speak of those who deny its reality as being not merely ignorant, but actually evil in a sense. As they see it, these "deniers" are impeding efforts to deal with global climate change by their rejection of its reality. Thus, climate change believers seem to view those who disagree with them in a way quite similar to the way some religious believers view nonbelievers. Moreover, those who affirm the reality of global warming often talk about the need to reduce one's "carbon footprint," so as not to be contributing personally to global warming. This idea seems very reminiscent of the religious concept of making penance or atonement for one's sins. Indeed, some individuals go so far as to buy "carbon offsets" to make up for anything they have done that might have increased "greenhouse gas" emissions, like traveling on an airplane. This strikes me as being very similar to the notion of "indulgences" in the medieval Roman Catholic Church--paying money to remit the punishment for one's sins. Finally, global climate change is often spoken of in apocalyptic terms, nearly like the end of the world envisioned in many religions--although, unlike the biblical Apocalypse, the event can be put off if mankind "repents" of its environmental transgressions.
In short, the whole topic of global climate change has acquired a pseudo-religious aura. Because of this, it has become difficult to engage in an objective discussion of the issue because, like a set of religious beliefs, it tends to excite very strong feelings in some people. That is understandable in the case of religious belief (after all, as a religious believer myself I can certainly sympathize with the strong emotions people have regarding their most fundamental beliefs); it is, however, less understandable in the case of what is supposed to be a scientific issue.
Image from churchmilitant.com