# Why the conservative anger over climate change **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 16, 2015, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845 "2015-10-16T20:47:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/121 "2015-10-23T11:47:02Z")
Short answer to the OP: the anger comes from the same factors that makes these folks angry about “Big Government” and having to pay taxes: a perceived powerlessness against forces they don’t understand and which they perceive as threatening their comforts and well-being. There’s been a gradual but dramatic change in the level of scientific understanding of climate change in the past 35 to 40 years, and especially in the last few decades, and as the science became more certain and a consensus developed that we are facing a serious problem, the denialism industry went into high gear. One can see a definite shift in the political landscape as the deniers politicized the issue to counter increasingly dire scientific assessments especially in the past 15 years. These people perceive that their high-consumption lifestyles and economic well-being are under threat by a conspiracy of liberals and Marxists, the denialism industry (and their faith in God) is telling them that none of it is true, yet the science just won’t go away and remains front and center in the news. Ironically, their comforts and economic well-being and even their national security really are under threat, not from scientists and government agencies who are trying to address the problem, but from themselves. They’re under threat from obstructionists like themselves who are making it difficult to advance meaningful solutions. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/122 "2015-10-23T15:48:41Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Your biases are showing. I’ve never said conservatives are wise; overall they are just as stupid as liberals. Unfortunately, the big-business fears that liberals appear to have end up opposing nuclear power. But let you ask you again: what **current** solution is better than Yucca Mountain? Otherwise you’re just relying on the same stall tactics that AGW skeptics use. I’ve answered this question repeatedly; depositing nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain repository is not a solution to any problem. It is expensive to operate and transport waste, does not have sufficient capacity to store even the current volume of waste material presently being stored on-site at operating reactors, is build adjacent to a seismic fault line, opposed by the majority of residents of the state, and most significantly, avoids the consideration that we may need that “waste” in the future as fuel once we decide that the currently favored once-through enriched uranium fuel cycle really isn’t the best use of fissile material. It is a solution only in the sense that it puts the end cycle waste products out of sight in a state with a relatively sparse population so we don’t have to argue with residents of states like California or or Illinois about what to do with the waste produced to generate their electricity. Inspectable, secure, above-ground dry cask storage is perfectly adequate until such time as we develop the political will and/or are driven by economic need to implement reprocessing and energetic burnup technologies that have already been demonstrated to a proof-of-concept level of maturity. > [@Deeg](#): > > That’s good. Plenty of liberals are pro nuclear (like GIGO), just like plenty of conservatives are pro-AGW. However, what has the liberal political establishment done to push nuclear power? Very little. In the last ten sessions (104th through 113th, 1995 through 2015) the United States Congress has been fully dominated by the Republican party 60% of the time, continuous from 1995 through 2007 (104th through 109th), and enjoyed a significant majority in the House from 2011 (112th) through the present where they again have significant majorities in both houses. A cursory look through [govtrack.us](http://govtrack.us) on House and Senate bills and House resolutions shows a pretty thorough mix of Republicans and Democrats proposing laws or resolutions on nuclear power. So, assuming that Republicans are largely aligned with “conservative” views, it would seem that your question should be “What has the [DEL]liberal[/DEL]conservative establishment done to push nuclear power?” > [@Deeg](#): > > As before, we’ll just have to disagree. It is pretty obvious to me that on this one issue that it’s liberals who fear nuclear power more than conservatives. If may be “obvious” to you, but you have not demonstrated it factually. What is apparent, however, is that nobody, regardless of ideological bent, wants a nuclear reactor, fissile fuel processing and enrichment, or a radioactive waste repository in their neighborhood, regardless of presumed safety and net benefit to the environment, which is a greater hurdle than any technical, practicable solutions to dealing with spent nuclear fuel. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/123 "2015-10-23T17:05:52Z")
**Stranger** what present current or feasible uses are there for most nuclear waste. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/124 "2015-10-23T17:24:34Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > I’ve answered this question repeatedly; depositing nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain repository is not a solution to any problem. No you haven’t. You keep coming up with reasons why YM is not a solution without giving any better solution that we can implement now. [This NY Times article](http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/05/10/10greenwire-gao-death-of-yucca-mountain-caused-by-politica-36298.html?pagewanted=all) quotes the GAO as indicating that YM was shut down for purely political reasons by Obama. The first paragraph: _The Obama administration’s rushed efforts to shut down Yucca Mountain were strictly political and could set back the opening of a nuclear waste repository by more than 20 years, according to a new report by a federal watchdog._ Conservatives are afraid of AGW because solutions require (to some extent) Big Government. Liberals are afraid of nuclear power because it requires (to some extent) Big Corporation. It’s frustrating. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/125 "2015-10-23T17:55:12Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > …is build adjacent to a seismic fault line > [@](#): > > [The DOE says this frequent, if low-level, seismic activity does not pose a threat to potential safe nuclear storage some five miles (eight kilometers) under Yucca Mountain. The DOE says on its Yucca Mountain web page (which remains the same as it was pre-President Obama and his Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who both oppose it as a nuke repository) in a posting that’s been there since 2003: > > “Experience with earthquakes throughout the world has shown that underground structures can withstand the ground motion generated by earthquakes. And, in actual tests at the Nevada Test Site mine tunnels have withstood ground motion from underground nuclear explosions that are greater than any ground motion anticipated at or near Yucca Mountain.”]([Loose nukes: Would earthquakes around Yucca Mountain make it unsafe to hold nuclear waste? | Scientific American](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/news-blog/loose-nukes-would-earthquakes-aroun-2009-03-10/)) But the global warming folks are all about the science. Right. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/126 "2015-10-23T18:23:22Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Conservatives are afraid of AGW because solutions require (to some extent) Big Government. Liberals are afraid of nuclear power because it requires (to some extent) Big Corporation. It’s frustrating. The first part correctly describes conservative perceptions, as I was just saying above, and is exacerbated by an irrational distrust of both government and science (but a strange, almost child-like faith in the wisdom and integrity of the oil industry!). The second part just isn’t accurate in any respect. There’s no monolithic view on nuclear power linked to ideology, and many progressives are in favor of it. Case in point: I live in Ontario which is a pretty liberal province in a pretty liberal country, and more than half of all electric power generation here is nuclear. Much of the rest is hydro-electric. Coal-fired plants have been systematically dismantled and as of last year, the total number of coal-fired plants operated by Ontario Power Generation is … zero, the culmination of what’s been described as the largest climate change initiative in North America. This would not have been possible without the nuclear power infrastructure. Furthermore, OPG is less “Big Corporation” as it is an agency of government, since it’s a crown corporation, i.e.- a public company wholly owned by the government, just like the fine folks who run the “government liquor stores”. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/127 "2015-10-23T19:13:58Z")
I suppose it would be a waste of time to ask for your evidence of this alleged child-like faith that characterizes conservatives. Unless it was just exaggeration and hyperbole. Not that there is anything wrong with wild over-statements that denigrate one’s opponents, especially when it should be all about the science. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/128 "2015-10-23T19:45:29Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > But the global warming folks are all about the science. Right. > > Regards, > Shodan Unless you want to also make the point that all that 75% in opposition are scientists or liberals. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/129 "2015-10-23T19:51:17Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I suppose it would be a waste of time to ask for your evidence of this alleged child-like faith that characterizes conservatives. Not all conservatives. Just the deniers. And sure, I’m happy to oblige. Given the scientific consensus that the planet is warming, that anthropogenic carbon emissions are the dominant cause, and that there will be serious consequences if left unchecked, why is there even a “debate” about the basic science? How did this denialist “side” even come to exist with zero scientific support? How come Republican presidential candidates are such consistent denialists? How come this aligns so perfectly with the historical propaganda from the oil and coal industries? This level of science denial on a major public policy issue is unprecedented. For so many to be so misled on the basis of such flagrant distortions of fact is a propaganda victory on a par with the best work of Joseph Goebbels. Except it’s conducted for financial gain by a shady network of astroturfers and PR firms and a few anti-government ideologues. Take a look through peer-reviewed scientific publications and the scientific consensus on the central climate change issues is indisputable. But Google the Internet on any given climate topic and at least 80% of what comes up is outright denialism, often hostile anti-science frothing at the mouth. I could take any of those articles and make a drinking game out of it by taking a swig every time I come across a flagrantly distorted fact or outright fabrication, but I wouldn’t survive the night. Yet, which version of reality do a majority of conservatives believe? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/130 "2015-10-23T20:18:06Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I suppose it would be a waste of time to ask for your evidence of this alleged child-like faith that characterizes conservatives. Unless it was just exaggeration and hyperbole. > > Not that there is anything wrong with wild over-statements that denigrate one’s opponents, especially when it should be all about the science. > > Regards, > Shodan I guess you missed that even a slight majority of conservatives do not have that child-like faith, unfortunately that child-like faith is maintained by the ones that most Republicans are electing to congress and it is way pass the time that many conservatives should pay attention to the children that they are electing to office. > **[Here Are the 56 Percent of Congressional Republicans Who Deny Climate Change...](https://billmoyers.com/2015/02/03/congress-climate-deniers/)** > > A compilation of the politicians on the wrong side of history. > [@](#): > > All told, 170 elected representatives in the 114th Congress have taken over $63.8 million from the fossil fuel industry that’s driving the carbon emissions which cause climate change. They deny what over 97 percent of scientists say is happening — current human activity creates the greenhouse gas emissions that trap heat within the atmosphere and cause climate change. And their constituents are paying the price, with Americans across the nation suffering 500 climate-related national disaster declarations since 2011. > > This list will be updated regularly. > [@](#): > > Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA-01): “The climate of the globe has been fluctuating since God created it.” [Redding Record, 9/24/14] > > … > > Rep. Jeff Miller (R-FL-01): “I have scientists that I rely on, the scientists that I rely on say our climate has changed. It wasn’t just a few years ago, what was the problem that existed? It wasn’t global warming, we were gonna all be an ice cube. We’re not ice cubes. Our climate will continue to change because of the way God formed the earth.” According to BuzzFeed, earlier at the same event, Miller announced his intentions to defund the Environmental Protection Agency and responded to questions about a scientific consensus on climate change by saying none existed. [BuzzFeed, 8/14/13] > > … > > Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL-15): During his introductory remarks at a House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment hearing, Representative Shimkus read from the Bible to prove that global warming will not destroy the earth because only God can decide when the earth will end: “The earth will end only when God declares it is time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood.” [House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Hearing, 3/25/2009] > > … > > Rep. Todd Rokita (R-IN-04): “97 percent of some of the liberal scientists polled believe humans are doing this. This is not settled science just like perhaps many pf those same scientists — 97 percent perhaps — believe there is no god. But they don’t know there’s no science on that. So scientists like the rest of us humans can have beliefs but that doesn’t make it science.” [Mother Jones, 10/28/14] > > … > > Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC-05): “North Carolina Republican Virginia Foxx referenced books by climate-change skeptics and lamented that some environmentalists ‘think that we, human beings, have more impact on the climate and the world than God does.’” [Huffington Post, 4/7/11] > > … > > Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC-06): “We can be green without being extreme. Much of the ‘so-called’ science of climate change is contested though it’s made a few politicians quite wealthy. I believe that God provided the earth to us and we have a responsibility to conserve and respect the environment.” [Walker for North Carolina, last accessed 12/8/14] Many more examples of that child like faith and weapon’s grade ignorance in the link. And once again: More than half of republicans polled recently do think the issue is real and needs to be taken care of, even with regulations. Add then the democrats and independents and it is currently a super majority that does think that we should something now rather than later, it is the Republicans in congress the ones that are the weakest link. [http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/Global-Warming-CCAM-March-2015](http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/Global-Warming-CCAM-March-2015) > [@](#): > > Solid majorities of Americans “strongly” or “somewhat” support the following policies: > o Increased funding for improvements to local roads, bridges, and buildings to make them more resistant to extreme weather (81%) > o Providing tax rebates to people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels (80%) > o Funding more research into renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power (79%) > o Regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant (75%) > o Requiring electric utilities to produce at least 20% of their electricity from wind, solar, or other renewable energy sources, even if it costs the average household an extra $100 a year (66%) > > • Seven in ten Americans (70%) support setting strict carbon dioxide emission limits on existing coal-fired plants to reduce global warming and improve public health, even though the cost of electricity would likely increase. > • About half of Americans (51%) say it is at least moderately important that the next congressional candidate they vote for share their views on global warming. About three in ten (31%) say it is slightly or not at all important. > • Among Americans who think global warming is happening, a majority (63%) say that it is at least moderately important that the next congressional candidate they vote for share their views on global warming. By contrast, fewer Americans who think global warming is not happening (38%) say it is at least moderately important that the next congressional candidate they vote for share their views on global warming. ---
**Author:** ![Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/6bbea6/32.png) [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/131 "2015-10-23T20:22:40Z")
Those quotes above from Republican representatives make me embarrassed to be American. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/132 "2015-10-23T21:09:15Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > The first part correctly describes conservative perceptions, as I was just saying above, and is exacerbated by an irrational distrust of both government and science (but a strange, almost child-like faith in the wisdom and integrity of the oil industry!). I disagree with your premise. Conservatives have no problems with science when it comes to GMO or nuclear power (we’re talking in generalities; there are always individual exceptions). Both sides are guilty of ignoring science when it collides with their core beliefs. It’s not a conservative or liberal problem; it’s part of the human condition. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/133 "2015-10-23T21:50:58Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I disagree with your premise. Conservatives have no problems with science when it comes to GMO or nuclear power (we’re talking in generalities; there are always individual exceptions). Uh, you are still pushing the idea that 75% of people in opposition to a nuclear dump are all liberals. I say that ignoring that only makes your logic to be even more flawed. > [@Deeg](#): > > Both sides are guilty of ignoring science when it collides with their core beliefs. It’s not a conservative or liberal problem; it’s part of the human condition. The problem here is that on many subjects you are wrong on thinking that both sides do it just the same, in reality it seems that in just about two of the subjects discussed conservatives have just about as much problems with GMOs and vaccines, like liberals or independents. > **[Stop pretending that liberals are just as anti-science as conservatives](https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/left-science-gmo-vaccines/)** > > No, GMOs and vaccines are not the liberal equivalent of climate denial. > [@](#): > > For the most part, the results support Lewandowsky and Khan. GMO concern appears largely spread across the spectrum in this poll, and while it is somewhat stronger among Democrats (and, as we’ll see, especially strong on the far left), it is also very strong among Republicans and independents. For instance, the poll found that all three groups overwhelmingly support the labeling of foods containing GM ingredients (an idea the American Association for the Advancement of Science rejects): 90 percent of Republicans, 94 percent of Democrats, and 95 percent of independents were in favor. > > Getting closer to a purely scientific issue, respondents were asked, “How concerned are you about genetically modified or genetically engineered food—Very concerned, somewhat concerned, not too concerned or not at all concerned?” Seventy-one percent of Republicans, 80 percent of Democrats, and 75 percent of independents said they were either “very” or “somewhat” concerned. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/134 "2015-10-23T21:59:52Z")
The most important point that should not be forgotten is that the extremists and ignorants are less like likely to be put in office by the liberal voters. This is particularly evident for the subject of the thread. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2015, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/135 "2015-10-23T22:31:32Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I disagree with your premise. Conservatives have no problems with science when it comes to GMO or nuclear power (we’re talking in generalities; there are always individual exceptions). > > Both sides are guilty of ignoring science when it collides with their core beliefs. It’s not a conservative or liberal problem; it’s part of the human condition. Is that why you find Republican anti-vaxers, Republican climate change deniers, Republican young-earthers and evolution deniers? If they support GMO or nuclear power it’s just that it conforms with their ideology that private enterprise and the principles of capitalism can solve all our problems. Liberals may be more cautious about letting private enterprise go nuts with potentially unsafe ideas (I’m mean, it’s not like that’s never happened, right?) but by and large are much more willing to embrace scientific fact – I think that’s been amply demonstrated above. Your premise is just nonsense and is, at best, supportable by citing examples of a few crackpots, as opposed to the Republican case where mainstream politicians make science denial (climate science in particular) a central part of their policy. Among progressives, nuclear power tends to be particularly supported by those with an acute scientific awareness of the perils of climate change – for instance: [Four top environmental scientists call on leaders to embrace nuclear power](http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/03/world/nuclear-energy-climate-change-scientists-letter/) … “There is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include … nuclear power,” says letter. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/136 "2015-10-24T04:29:48Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Uh, you are still pushing the idea that 75% of people in opposition to a nuclear dump are all liberals. I say that ignoring that only makes your logic to be even more flawed. We’ve gone over multiple times and I believe you are just plain wrong. By far the biggest nuke opponents are leftist groups like Greenpeace and Sierra Club. There is no equivalent far-right group. You try to use NIMBY in NV to prove that conservatives are just as anti-nuke but it’s a false premise; NIMBYism, like anti-science, has no political bias. Besides, the biggest anti-nuker in NV is Democrat Senator Reid. The GAO has stated that YM was shut down **by Democrats** for purely political reasons, not practical ones. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/137 "2015-10-24T04:37:46Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Is that why you find Republican anti-vaxers, Republican climate change deniers, Republican young-earthers and evolution deniers? > > If they support GMO or nuclear power it’s just that it conforms with their ideology that private enterprise and the principles of capitalism can solve all our problems. Liberals may be more cautious about letting private enterprise go nuts with potentially unsafe ideas (I’m mean, it’s not like that’s never happened, right?) but by and large are much more willing to embrace scientific fact – I think that’s been amply demonstrated above. Your premise is just nonsense and is, You were doing alright until that last sentence. You are using the time-honored tradition of demonizing those who think differently to make your own positions sound better. _shrug_ Yes, conservatives deny AGW and evolution because it violates their core beliefs. Liberals deny GMO and nuclear power because it violates their core beliefs. Anti-vaxxers seem to be on both sides, probably because vaccinations violate core beliefs on both sides (Big Government, Big Pharma). It does seem like the biggest bastion of anti-vaxxers are educated white women of means in liberal communities but I’ve never seen any kind of numbers to support that. Either way I believe I am unbiased enough to see how people ignore science regardless of their political beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/138 "2015-10-24T04:39:27Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > The most important point that should not be forgotten is that the extremists and ignorants are less like likely to be put in office by the liberal voters. This is particularly evident for the subject of the thread. I dunno…Obama shutting down a viable nuclear storage facility for **purely political reasons** seems like kowtowing to extremists and ignorants. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/139 "2015-10-24T04:57:30Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Liberals deny GMO and nuclear power because it violates their core beliefs. Once again, not adding the chunk of conservatives that is virtually as large as the liberals there does not make you sound unbiased. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845/140 "2015-10-24T04:59:03Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I dunno…Obama shutting down a viable nuclear storage facility for **purely political reasons** seems like kowtowing to extremists and ignorants. Also of the conservative kind, it can not be avoided as much as you want to. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-conservative-anger-over-climate-change/734845.md?page=8)