Why is the climate change issue divided along party lines?
 

This is something I've never understood. It's almost as if conservatives care less about their children's future than progressives do.

Why are right-wingers so resistant to the hard science behind it and choose to ignore the vast majority of climatologists.

Please help me understand why we're so divided on this issue.

I have never understood greed, selfishness or willingness to ignore the obvious. Have come to conclude they that do must feel it is to late now. So enjoy it while you can.
Or to hard work and requiring sacrifices they being what they are will not endure.
So believe what makes them happy.
But looking back on human history we have as a species would use up an area and move on to greener pastures. Now we have run out of places to go.

So in a nut shell it describes the general Republican I know.......

Also a trait common is the willingness to have others pay.

Two parties equals two side on each issue be it global warming, abortion, globalization, voting rights...

There is no two sides to climate change.
It is here and not going away!

It's to do with regulations, less regulations, no regulations even better.

Because the far right don't have the ability to think. Just look at the posts from our resident wingnuts. They don't think, or reason, or read, they simply spout whatever nonsense they're being fed by InsHannity, Limbow, Fucker Carlson, etc.

Scientists? "Leftists!" Any post from Whell... :rolleyes: DonD is headed that way, sadly - a Fucker Carlson wingnut.

This is about it. Add in that big oil wanted it this way. But for the rank and file, it's just a matter of 'this is what people like us think.'

Carlson is doing a great job exposing the neo-cons in both parties.

The war pigs bemoan his influence.

I can see this being the reason but it doesn't make sense that they're not concerned about the mess they're passing on to their kids and grandkids.

The reason is actually pretty simple. There are two different world views and there is also a difference in the level of credibility each side gives authority figures.

You'll notice that the younger population is more leftist while the older generations are more classical liberal (commonly called "conservative"). When you are a kid, you tend to believe everything an adult you respect tells you. As you get older, you realize that adults are often just kids in bigger bodies. And being one of them, and being older and wiser, if only through osmosis, you are less likely to believe them unless they can back up what they say - and even then you may want a second opinion.

But kids lock on to an adult they respect and tend to absorb everything that person utters as "gospel". And then there is the Greta phenomenon. She gave an impassioned speech and then, at the press conference afterward, couldn't even answer the most simple softball question. That is because she is a "mouthpiece". We don't get our wisdom from a 17 year old girl propped up in front of us by a bunch of handlers. The left is more likely to soak up this kind of stuff.

And yes, I remember how my mind worked before I was 25 - the age at which the human brain becomes fully developed and is prepared to think and plan for beyond the current moment.

This is also why the Karens tend to be from the left and the "this is just the flu" folks tend to be from the right regarding CV19. The more you've been lied to, the less you respect the source. The young people are not old enough to have been lied to for decades and figured it out. When they do, it's an eye opener. Often they become conservatives and often they just throw out the whole thing and go independent. Some just stop voting.

Here's an actual adult with solid credentials on global warming, BTW:

https://realclimatescience.com/