In the current discourse of global climate change, polarising figures often emerge and sway public opinion.

Their impact depends upon who you're asking and what their perspective on the subject is. One person walking this razor-thin edge between being hailed as a hero and derided as a villain is Swedish activist Greta Thunberg.

Emerging onto the public stage with her school strike for the climate outside the Swedish parliament in August 2018 at the age of 15, Thunberg has become the face of the youth movement against climate crisis. Now, nearly five years later, her voice is as powerful as ever.

She continues to lead marches worldwide, speaks at notable forums such as the United Nations and Davos and has even been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

On one side of the coin, she's seen as a hero by many. She has managed to do what environmental scientists and activists have spent decades attempting to do - bring the urgency of the climate crisis into global focus. Thunberg has sparked a massive movement, with millions around the world taking part in 'Fridays for Future' demonstrations, emulating her protest outside the Swedish Parliament.

She inspires many with her unwavering commitment to the climate cause, her refusal to soften her demands for the sake of political comfort, and her dedication to speaking truth to power. Moreover, as a young person with a global profile, Greta has become a beacon of hope and agency for her generation, using her platform to empower and mobilise people of all ages to take action for the planet.

Yet, there's another viewpoint where Thunberg is viewed as a villain. Detractors claim that she presents a doomsday narrative that causes more panic than it does propel action. Critics also argue that she oversimplifies an extremely complex issue and fails to appreciate the intricacies of economic and political realities that govern global climate policy. Furthermore, some argue that she is being manipulated by adults with political agendas, reducing her to a puppet rather than an independent and informed actor.

Thunberg's confrontational approach has also rubbed some the wrong way. Her speeches, very impassioned and laden with righteous anger, have not always served her cause well. Her phrasing, such as telling leaders at the United Nations that they have "stolen her dreams and her childhood" with their "empty words", have fuelled debate over the severity of her approach.

Questioning if Thunberg is a villain, however, seems to abandon the larger conversation at hand: the urgency of the climate crisis. Whether her rhetoric is seen as inspiring or inflammatory, is it distracting from the message that, according to an increasingly large body of scientific evidence, we urgently need to address climate change to avoid catastrophic consequences?