Your argument would be logical if climate change was 'science', and not created by government institutions. Global warming is a scientific concept, but climate change was created by the United Nations when they created the IPCC.

The IPCC's charter is to create 'science' that can inform government policy. When institutions like government create 'science' and knowledge for an agenda, it stops being 'science' and becomes technology. If government creates 'science', one can no longer believe in impartial 'science' but must look at the government's political agenda.

So 'climate change' is not 'science' but rather technology with a government agenda recommending state action. This makes it purely political. The UN's agenda is to recommend top down actions. Thus climate change 'science' advocates for the UN and global politics to implement policies.

This is why climate change produces such craziness. It is not science, but rather scientific rational for global politics.