What is evident from the OP (and, for that matter, from his overall posting history) is that @rboyce understands nothing at all. The entire OP is a pile of ungodly drivel that is a sort of putrid mix of abject ignorance with a bit of irrelevance thrown in. He’s a useless troll, but a spectacularly stupid one.
That’s a really stupid thing to say. Politics didn’t “lead to” climate science. Climate science evolved on its own. Modern climate science could be regarded as having had its start in a report called Understanding Climatic Change: A Program for Action , issued in 1975 by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, and specifically an NRC group called the US Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research Program. The purpose of the report – several decades before the IPCC even existed – was to make recommendations about setting up research programs so that the right questions about climate change could be asked, and eventually answered.
As the research progressed, and the evidence became incontrovertible that anthropogenic climate change was a very serious problem, that was when powerful fossil-fuel and industrial interests and the politicians they controlled started distorting and politicizing the science. And the more clear and stark the evidence – like Michael Mann’s paleoclimate temperature reconstructions resulting in the famous “hockey stick” graph – the harder and more vicious the pushback. Mann himself has been subject to numerous political attacks, witch hunts, and even personal threats, as have many other climate scientists.
But the science itself has continued to evolve as science always does: slowly, conservatively, but inexorably focused on evidence and truth. And the more we discover about climate change and the human role in it, the more worried those in the know become about the existential threat we are facing.