Imagine there were two weather forecasts on TV after the news, one for Labour, one for Conservatives. You'd think it was crazy, as it would be. Or a concert of communist music. Politics can creep into everything, probably best demonstrated by Hitler's selection of music by Jew-haters, but in the arts and sciences it is rarely connected or relevant. You can't listen to a piece of classical music and work out the political intent of the writer, even if Hitler chose to select what Germany was permitted to listen to, and the weather will rain equally on the left or right alike.
Strangely within a very short time of Al Gore announcing to the world it was melting, and the only way to stop it was to stop using fossil fuel (and as a result economic production and travelling, as well as heating and power) an initially small section of the extreme left, the green wing so to speak, jumped for joy as suddenly their wishes, previously consigned to the dark corridors of mental wards and obscure council chambers had overnight become mainstream. They knew little or nothing of the climate till then, as they still don't, but they now had the world's powers behind what they had been trying to do (don't ask why, only they can try and tell you) and sod the actual reason, genuine or not.
Then gradually the centre left jumped on the bandwagon, not out of sheer hate for mankind as the Greens, but a sentimental and false caring for others, so much so it allows them to raise the fuel bills so high for old people they die of cold every winter. But when we are talking about science, the temperature, ice cover and sea level are the same as sticking a thermometer up your arse. It doesn't know the intent of the doctor but just measures blindly whether you want one result or another. Technically there is a much room for politics in scientific measurement as music or choosing your wallpaper. So when the left (it's only the left) accuse deniers of global warming (as they so lovingly refer to us) as right wing killers of children, while they appear almost as a united front as left wingers they must also believe in global warming as part of their primary agenda. Fair enough, it attacks both capitalists and capitalism, but it does not make it automatically right. Just because the means to deal with a problem (should it exist) actually coincides with some or all of your wishes does not entitle anyone to use it as a weapon.
It is precisely the politicisation of science which has allowed a new army of activists who know less than a small child about science but a lot about how they want to change the world. As a result any challenge to their plan by the impersonal thermometers and float gauges results in a deeper entrenchment and attack of the enemy whoever they see they are. To them the science has to stay right or their first and probably only chance to impose their wishes on the world will wither on the vine. The sheer power they now hold, having united internationally with the backing of the worlds richest organisations headed by George Soros, David Rockefeller and Al Gore such as MoveOn.org and the Environmental Media Services, all Club of Rome and Bilderberg members, their power has overtaken world politics purely by it's weight and not its quality. The quality weakens year by year as predictions made from past decade to past decade reach maturity and fall away. It is clearly less certain each decade than the one previously, yet they scream louder and louder when we simply read the graphs and notice it.
Politics is not anything more than personal opinion in action. Left or right, free or controlled. At no place in a science degree do they teach any of it, or tell the students certain parts such as the environment are more left wing than say geology. But now they are, and it's a crime against everything in society and history.