NY Times has been running a series of articles blaming every fire and extreme weather event on climate change. This does two things:

1. Convinces liberals of the coming apocalypse of climate change, since it aligns with their views.

2. Convinces conservatives that the climate change folks are lying, since there are several logical steps missing, and it doesn't align with their views.

I'm sure some of those events are related to climate change. I'm sure some aren't. I don't think we really know which is which.

The problem with using (transparently) bad logic to get to a correct conclusion is that people no longer trust you.

If you look at conservative media, they point to (now obviously wrong) predictions from the eighties, where citations and reporting would go to the most extreme predictions.

It's really hard to convince someone of something after they've been lied to multiple times.