Belief in climate change does not divide into a simple dichotomy of (good) believers and (evil)
nonbelievers. An unclear view of skepticism arises when the differences between empirical and
normative claims are revealed. Developing responsible beliefs on matters of which we possess
no expertise requires reliable expert testimony. However, trust and objectivity are integral factors
for belief in expert consensus. A reduction in public opinion regarding the reliability of climate
science, due to politicization, enables the dismissal anthropogenic climate change.
Understanding politicization from both Pielke and Douglas clarifies a negative role that politics
can play in the doing of science. The risks that politicization pose, mistrust for one, do not
undermine the necessary role of values in science. The role of values within scientific enquiry
must be restricted and acknowledged for trustworthy science to be produced, and for scientific
findings regarding climate change to be accepted by nonexperts, including policymakers.
