Why has climate science become a left/right question in US politics?

"Merchants of Doubt" sounds like a great title for a Christian schlockumentary on Richard Dawkins. Listen and believe is the defining feature of dogmatism. AGW proponents screaming "DENIALIST!" at anyone they disagree with (even at people who do believe in AGW like James Hansen for the crime of suggesting the "wrong" cure) is why you have a backlash (that and letting socialists hijack your movement and turn it into a rallying cry to smash capitalism). Subtle nuisance like "I believe in climate change but the doomsday scenarios are overblown" or "I believe in climate change and nuclear power is the way to fix it" is not acceptable and will get you labeled a denialist, which is one of the morally reprehensible pejoratives being thrown out.

Not everyone uses it this way, but there are some who says climate change deniers=Holocaust deniers. If you use "climate change denier" but not in this manner, I'm not talking about you, but if you are, you are a fucking piece of shit. Seriously, equating a disagreement over the climate to someone who is an apologist for a genocidal madman is absolutely morally reprehensible. Even putting aside the morality of such a comparison, the Holocaust was an event with multiple eyewitnesses while climate change science is a prediction of future events based on computer models that don't always get it right

drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1.png

that leads to some erroneous predictions.

telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/10/07/experts-said-arctic-sea-ice-would-melt-entirely-by-september-201/

Sorry, but the Holocaust has far more evidence and less room for skepticism than climate science.

No, I'm not claiming dumping a bunch of CO2 in the atmosphere is a good thing or won't have an effect. So don't bother with strawmaning. But because climate science is a work-in-progress, don't treat it like it's some moral absolute if people don't see it your way.

>You never let a serious crisis go to waste.
That quote is literally millenia older than Chicago

>golden opportunity to force socialism to the masses
you cannot be this retarded

>But because climate science is a work-in-progress,
As opposed to which science that is finished again?

you need to be careful about buying what the devil is selling, there's always fine print

the marxists are constantly packaging in more and more of their dangerous 'cultural revolution' into politics and it's exactly why people are sick of it

>future events
sure buddy

>That quote is literally millenia older than Chicago

That quote is only a few years old and it's still relevant. Democrats haven't changed and are still pulling the same old shit.

They aren't retarded, it's just another chapter from the same playbook that big tobacco used

youtu.be/HD2zixRoBP8?t=26m

Because americans are fucking stupid

...

>>missing the point entirely
Politicians have always known how to use a good crisis.
You're acting like this only a new thing, an (American) democrat thing, or an American thing.

> Bush didn't use 9/11
> FDR didn't use Pearl Harbor
> Churchill didn't use Lusitania
> Hitler didn't use the German depression

The idea that crises and fortune are interlinked dates back to Herodot (5th century B.C.) AT LEAST.

2500 years is a bit more than "a few years" in my book.

Also, the notion that someone having a vested interest meaning that all of climate science is fake is just the usual grand conspiracy theory rubbish.
There is always someone that has a hidden agenda, a vested interest - but that applies to both sides. You might as well say that Big Oil, Big Coal or anyone else is impacting climate science with their hidden agendass.

>Alternative facts

Notice how deniers, yes, we know how much you faggots hate that word, use the same language that has been used for decades in anti-scientific agendas. Ironic considering they use language like "warmist" to refer to scientists who publish evidence on climate change. You are deniers, plain and simple. The evidence exists, we know its effects, we can make projections (no, not predictions, projections) about the future climate of the Earth, and they have been extremely accurate, if not underestimating the trends.

Junk science, dogma, cult, religion. Same exact playbook of all the numerous anti-science movements from the 20th and 21st century. It's almost if the same exact people spreading an anti-science agenda today are, surprise, the same exact people and groups who have been using these tactics for decades.

Here's one such example of a useful idiot to their cause. Eats up their propaganda without question, believes himself to be "morally superior" in his blasted definitions of skepticism and science itself. These types of people are the reason that no action has been taken on climate change in decades, until the problem has grown out of our control. Doesn't matter for people like this though, they get to spread their propaganda and benefit their masters who profit off the misinformation they have sowed. All of their masters who care nothing for the future of civilization, only the profits they can make in the present, will be long dead and buried by the time the effects of climate change reign down on our civilization.

>I'm not claiming dumping a bunch of CO2
>in the atmosphere is a good thing or won't
>have an effect.
Fine, so what are you claiming, faggot?

I'm starting to think people need to use specific indication of climate change. Man made climate change or naturally changing?

Republicans have generally become a pro-big-business party, and big business stands the most to lose economically if anti-climate-change actions are taken.

You should actually read Oreskes book, it's a lot better than the documentary which itself is still great.

You should also try reading Doubt is their Product, another great book on the same topic.

There was also a PBS Frontline report a few years ago on the politics of climate change, it's worth watching.
youtube.com/watch?v=J8te6eAZSlc

He's claiming that he's a massive faggot and shill.

Pretty much, it's sad how people that deny the science conveniently ignore all the dirty money and politics behind their so called "experts." who oppose the scientific evidence.
theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/15/exxon-mobil-gave-millions-climate-denying-lawmakers

Republicans basically change their stance on this issue based on how its polling in the public. Trump's entire administration is filled with people that deny the scientific evidence, it's just really sad. I hated Hillary, and I didn't want her to be president, but fuck, at least she would have been similar to Obama on climate change, accepting the evidence, while not really doing too much to change anything. At least maybe her administration would have kept the funding to do climate research, and not pulled us out of the Paris agreement.

Because everything has

That's some pretty pathetic quote mining.

>science
>left/right

Science *is* Left because is is progress. Socialism and science are so closely intertwined you cannot separate them and you would try to do so only if you are some redneck reactionary buying the latest opportunistic 1 percenter's populistic nonsense.
You on the right have your things though. Like jesus and unicorns I guess.

The policy implications partition that way. Leftists are misanthropes that want to salt the earth for Gaea and the right wants to cuck for industry.

Because people have trouble differentiating between reality, wishful thinking, propaganda and scientific truth. In the early 2000s, oil companies pumped millions of $s worth of propaganda into GOP circles. If we recall, the GOP has always had a propensity towards ideological purity, mass indoctrination, etc so they took what the GOP leaders and Fox news said without critically thinking about what was being said. So, even though there are entire libraries devoted entirely to climate science, these individuals will never entertain or play "devils advocate" because their ideological bias prevents them from thinking critically.

Because the left corrupted the field to serve their watermelon agenda, and the right noticed.

>The left corrupted the field
In with the boogeyman agenda again I see. I'm not even a liberal or a "leftist" but I guess as someone who seeks to actually understand the scientific evidence for global warming, that makes me a "leftist?" People like yourselves are the entire reason this process has been politicized. It began in the 1980s with companies like Exxon started to do research on climate change, as its impacts could open up further regions to exploit petroleum, so they had a vested interest in understanding it at the time. Once the implications of climate change became clear, they started an anti-regulatory and anti-scientific crusade to obfuscate the evidence and create a cloud of doubt and misinformation about the science, you have played right into their hands.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy

No, sadly, it's anti-regulatory libertarians and conservatives that bear the vast majority of the blame for politicizing a scientific field of study, not "leftists." It's very easy to make shit up though when you are so vague and non-specific about the issue.

>Watermelon agenda

In with the Rush Limbaugh mannerisms already I see. You guys are so predictable, so obvious, it's hilarious honestly. You follow the party line lock stock and barrel, parrot whatever drivel your shills tell you to parrot because you have not one original idea or thought to begin with.
The sad part is that you have completely bought into a designed misinformation system specifically designed to target ignorant Americans such as yourself with an anti-science, pro business agenda, but you're too deluded to see what's right in front of you.

>>>/reddit/

I have a great motive to rob a bank and get away with it scot free, but that isn't very meaningful information without other evidence.

The irresponsible vs. the irresponsible feigning concern FOR MONEY.
Irresponsible people deny cause and effect. They deny global energizing (warming) that is based on same principles/science that says being in a closed garage with CO is toxic and can be fatal. You can't change stupid people because they "like" stupid.