It's inexplicable to me that conservatives seem to represent the vast majority of the science deniers. I guess it's a combination of low scientific literacy, lack of education, paranoid conspiracy theories, fixed persistent party-line thinking, and perhaps fundamentalist religion/creationism. I don't know. One thing for certain, conservatives seem to hate academia and higher education. On the subject of climate change, conservatives can not seem to separate science from political agenda. They see it as one in the same, a classical persistent response pattern.
Well, the science deniers' big scandal has fizzled.
Investigations clear scientists of impropriety and dishonesty
British investigators clear the East Anglia scientist at the center of it all, Phil Jones, of scientific impropriety and dishonesty in April, an investigation at Penn State cleared PSU climatologist Michael Mann of “falsifying or suppressing data, intending to delete or conceal e-mails and information, and misusing privileged or confidential information” in February.
Newspapers around the world are retracting their claims of fraud and scientific dishonesty. The campaign of lies is now exposed. Of course the Faux News right wing media machine has already spread the lies. Doesn't matter. Limbaugh and Levin tell them what to think.
For the record, yes, I believe the climate is changing, as it always has. Yes, human activity is definitely a factor in recent warming. That is accepted scientific fact. Can humans effectively halt climate change? I doubt it, I am skeptical, at least in our lifetime. The trend has already been established, and perhaps a 'tipping point' has been reached. Even if it were possible, it would be logistically impractical and improbable, at least in the short term. If it means a cleaner planet, it may be worth a try. I recognize there have been huge climate change events in the past, some triggered by seismic and impact events that would dwarf any effect of human activity and the warming we are now experiencing.