Global warming for liberals=intelligent design for conservatives.
One of the easiest debates for conservative politicians to win with the public is whether global warming is caused by man. Why? Not because they are right, but because the liberal politicians refuse to even consider whether they are wrong.
Instead of listening patiently to the arguments against the global warming theory and then countering with the many reasons as to why the theory is accurate, those who believe (including many of the scientists who support the theory) attack the credentials, motivations and intelligence of what is, admittedly, a significant minority of scientists.
This feeds right into the conservative belief that global warming is being pushed for non-scientific reasons. It's the exact same flaw that blew holes into the Intelligent Design theory that (briefly) became a topic of interest a few years ago.
And no, it doesn't matter to the popular debate that ID was supported by a small minority of mostly pseudo-scientists with a religious bent, and global warming is supported by the strong majority of scientists. In both cases, the refusal to debate the issue and consider possible holes in the theory eventually irritates the general public.
The failures of the ID supporters to open their proposal to scientific scrutiny was described very eloquently to me a few years ago by then-Rep. Steve Urquhart. Now, in a blog post on his website, he is basically making the same argument about why the global warming proponents are failing in their political push. It's a good read, especially for anyone who appreciates intelligent political discussions.
Alternatively, if reading intelligent discussion is not up your alley, watch the video below to learn about another great scientist who was in the minority when it came to a scientific theory. In this case, we can thank his refusal to accept the majority consensus for bubbles in our beer. (Yes, I know there's subtitles, but I'm too lazy to find a non-subtitled clip.)