There is a consensus about anthropogenic climate change. I do not dispute this statement.
Your list of references suggests otherwise.
"Many details about climate interactions are not well understood, and there are ample grounds for continued research to provide a better basis for understanding climate dynamics." I happen to believe that the devil is in the details. Even the grandest project depends on the success of the smallest components. The main question of what to do about the climate change has not been answered yet.
As with many other things, this is one which can't afford to wait till every last detail is known before people do things to try to remedy the situation. For one thing, the conditions aren't static so scientists are always playing catch-up. If we don't try to come up with remedies in the near future, it'll be too late. We've spent years being told that we need more research, by governments which have been busy cutting funding for research and pulling the plug on ongoing research projects. If high-profile campaigners like Prince Charles decide to shine a bright light on this institutionalised dishonesty, then more power to them.
Of course, any rich and privileged person is running the risk of being labelled a hypocrite if he takes on the role of champion of environmental issues or remediation of poverty. But that in many cases is just one of the tactics of people who don't want to see anything done about these issues. Yes, in many ways Charles, Al Gore, and other rich, influential people are being hypocritical. That doesn't make their ideas about the issues wrong.