Takes milliseconds on Google to find stuff about that - I just linked one from Forbes which provides a Trump tweet or two for you. I mean, I agree that Trump is not a serious guy, but he is in kind of a serious role.

The fact that hysterics over imminent doom on climate change don't include plans to invade countries that don't comply (we'd have to start by blowing ourselves up) doesn't say anything about the likelihood of possible future outcomes. If your point is that climate change hysterics are not helpful in moving the needle, I agree with that. But the fact that they aren't calling for world war to save the planet from environmental doom (nuclear powers at war doesn't seem like a way to protect the environment to me) doesn't mean that an existential risk is any less likely than if they were (if they were, I'd consider it more likely myself, given how good we are at killing each other now - WWII technology will look like Middle Age-era troops with bows and arrows).

Lots of pro-climate science people don't believe in the 2030 deadline. And nobody calls them climate change deniers. Most official policies are geared towards carbon neutrality by 2050, so that is a red herring.

Trump isn't just a skeptic about timing of the climate apocalypse. He is a full fledged denier of the science on the issue, and he resides in the White House.