Why is climate change denial unique to American conservatives?

Why is climate change denial unique to American conservatives?

Where did you get that idea? I already know. From the global Marxist politician-run U.N. IPCC octopus of kept scientists, academics, journalists, and politicians who have been hell-bent for over 30 years on pushing over their fake physics hoax that CO2 emissions must be stopped to prevent runaway global warming, just surrender all your wealth and self-government to them now and watch them set up a global Marxist police state in your backyard.

Technocratic domination: when government funds science, government controls science

Cancel culture in climate change

While the IPCC is so mentally bankrupt that they have to use ignorant mentally-ill teenies as their spokespersons, building them up into saints, there’s smart IPCC critics in every Western country. Some are more oppressed by the leftist-run govts. than others. Take Australia for instance. Control has been swinging back and forth for years. Meanwhile neighboring New Zealand is hopelessly under leftist control.

Back to the question.

Their practice of calling independent critics “climate change deniers” or “climate deniers” reveals their mindset of intolerance and lock-step conformity to the official position of their Communist Central Committee. Using the D word actually means shut up don’t rock the boat.

Long ago the IPCC threw science out when it comes to Earth’s climate and replaced it with politicized science where black is white and white is black so they can get their hands on the green. They’ve literally set back real research on the causes of Earth’s climate 30 years.

The IPCC lie machine even lies about all scientists being in a consensus about their bloomin’ onion of lies, although notice that the rank and file are cowed to silence and it’s hard to find out what they really think since it’s about protecting their incomes.

WFB On Google Ending Monetization Of ‘Climate Denial’

Why do many climate change deniers say they don't trust scientists but then cherry pick one quack that agrees with them?

EU countries drastically oppress their citizens to shut up and not rock the boat, punishing anybody who does with dire penalties, which hasn’t stopped a few brave scientists and journalists. It’s the U.S. and its pesky Yankee rebels and mutants that’s the last bastion of freedom of speech, but even here the global Marxists have made huge inroads by finding loopholes in the First Amendment, threatening to foist a federal law banning “hate speech”, which is just what the First Amendment was enacted to protect to allow emotions to be expressed without fear of govt. repression. Never fear, Old Glory along with the First Amendment are still standing strong like Fort McHenry no matter how many cannon shots it’s taken.

The IPCC CO2 Climate Narrative: A “Behemoth On Clay Feet” …Ready To Collapse. The earth’s history provides the solid proof that acquits CO2. The IPCC’s claim of CO2 being the dominant climate factor is a behemoth on clay feet.

EPJ Scientific Study : There Is No ‘Climate Crisis. Inconvenient study out of the esteemed EU Physical Journal Plus (EPJ) reaffirming that the "Climate Crisis" narrative is yet another deliberate and deceitful eco-slogan designed to frighten you into belief and compliance.

Consulting firm McKinsey estimates $9 trillion per year cost for climate accords

SURPRISE, SURPRISE! Global Lockdown Every Two Years Needed To Meet Paris CO2 Goals

Until the global Marxists stole the election from Pres. Trump to give the White House to their puppet Pres. Biden, the U.S. was the last bastion resisting the horrible 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, which Biden signed up for the first chance he got. It was never meant to get U.S. Senate approval as is required by the U.S. Constitution for treaties because the will of the People with a capital P is irrelevant to the global Marxist overlords at the U.N., who were originally set up to lord it over former Nazi-run countries after WWII supposedly to prevent them from rising again, but have now grown to within spitting distance of horrible Marxist hellholes where the disarmed powerless native population is considered deplorable and targeted for the Great Replacement by mass invasion under the guise of immigration while anybody speaking up about it is summarily canceled. This is the regime that critics of the U.N. IPCC have to live under, so no wonder it seems that only we Yankees speak out against it in relative safety so far despite all-out attempts of the far leftist-run Democratic Party to cancel us.

Germany's Multicultural Suicide

Free Speech in the UK?

Social Media Companies Allow Muslims to Preach Violence, Censor Those Who Oppose Jihad and Sharia Oppression

France: Le Pen goes on trial on charges she broke hate speech laws by tweeting pictures of Islamic State atrocities

Ilhan Omar Heads Down the Road to Islamofascism

Obama Sidesteps Senate Approval of Paris Agreement

To Paris and Beyond

Luckily for smart independent thinkers, nations that did sign up for the Paris Climate Accords are balking at coughing up the money for fear of taxpayer revolts at the insanely high price tag, so we’re safe for the foreseeable future.

COP26 Ends In Humiliating Failure

"THE REAL GLOBAL WARMING DISASTER IS FINANCIAL. Trillions needed annually for Paris Accord and unreliable wind and solar.' Renewables make world hunger worse. This is the most costly and useless scientific blunder in history.

Paris Accord ban on fossil fuels is a growing public disaster as wind and solar fail during severe weather and coal power must expand to alleviate billions without grid electricity suffering death from household smoke

What is the difference between the WEF's 'Great Reset' proposal and communism or socialism?

Why are most Republicans and conservatives today against environmental policies, when they themselves once sought to "conserve" the environment for future generations?

Are there any university Physics educated climate change skeptics who can definitively refute the 120 year old basis for Anthropogenic Global warming?

Climate change denial: what are the most rational arguments, in general, against a unified response, i.e. investment towards massive upgrades and technological advancements to our infrastructure, energy, and economic systems?

Any argument against massive expenditures to fight CO2-driven global warming is rational, because it’s a fake physics hoax pushed for political reasons by the global Marxist-run U.N. IPCC octopus, and their goal of dismantling the fossil fuel industry and replacing it with unworkable boondoggle solar and wind power is cultural suicide.

They never wanted the hundreds of trillions to change the climate, because the climate is controlled by solar radiation not atmospheric gases. Atmospheric CO2 is no threat because its radiation is indistinguishable from that from an iron rod chilled to -80C, which can’t melt an ice cube.

Why Are Greenhouse Gas Theories Dead Wrong?

The IPCC wants the thousands of gigabucks to redistribute to poor nations like Africa and India for their idea of Marxist social-racial justice. They can’t sell that program on its own merits, hence the need for a big lie to make useful idiots who will be guilt-tripped into paying “reparations” for their CO2 emissions.

The following article about how it took 26 IPCC COP conferences to finally “accept the science” shows how leftist Marxist politics has completely hijacked the real science, relegating real climate scientists like moi to the corners of the Web, mainly shadow-banned blogs, and Quora articles with little demand because of the smearing campaign.

COP26 accepted the science like never before. It should make a difference . Leading scientists, writing for Carbon Brief, explain how COP26 gave far greater recognition to science than any of the previous COPs. The scientific evidence from the latest IPCC reports was explicitly acknowledged in the Glasgow Climate Pact. That is a significant advance, say the authors. Decision-making guided by science can focus quantitively on carbon budgets

Is global warming based on predicted computer models or actual measured temperature change?

Interview: Climate Change – A Different Perspective with Judith Curry: Part II

CLINTEL to IPCC/COP26: AR6 Summary for Policymakers Flawed. “We conclude that the AR6 WG1 SPM regrettably does not offer an objective scientific basis on which to base policy discussions at COP26."