Claim: Instead of negotiating over climate change policies and trying to make them more market-oriented, some political conservatives have taken the approach of blocking them by trying to undermine the science.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: Conservative think tanks since the 1990s have opposed the concept of man-made global warming; challenged scientific evidence; publicized what they perceived as beneficial aspects of global warming, and asserted that proposed remedies would do more harm than good.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: Since then, Republicans have increasingly taken positions against environmental regulation, with some Republicans rejecting the scientific consensus on climate change.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The politics of global warming and climate change have polarized certain political parties and other organizations.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: However, others point to support for climate engineering proposals among think tanks with a history of global warming denial and opposition to emissions reductions as evidence that the prospect of climate engineering is itself already politicized and being promoted as part of an argument against the need for (and viability of) emissions reductions; that, rather than climate engineering being a solution to the difficulties of emissions reductions, the prospect of climate engineering is being used as part of an argument to stall emissions reductions in the first place.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Climate change denialism is the prime example, where a handful of scientists, allied with an effective PR machine, are publicly challenging the scientific consensus that global warming is real and is due primarily to human consumption of fossil fuels.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: This tactic, similar to those of large tobacco companies, was utilized by the lobby groups in the hopes of delaying action and blurring the lines between the valid scientific efforts to challenge climate change findings and those designed to merely undermine the credibility of the scientific community.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: In 2019, some Republican legislators broke with the party to advocate taking action on climate change, with market-based solutions rather than government regulations, and groups of younger Republicans began lobbying efforts in favor of a climate policy response.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The Climate Change Scientific Program was occasionally criticized for the alleged suppression of scientific information.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: This article is about the economics of climate change mitigation.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Although the Green New Deal is often presented as a left-wing proposal, criticism of it has come from left-wing commentators who have argued that the Green New Deal fails to tackle the real cause of the climate emergency, namely the concept of unending growth and consumption inherent in capitalism, and is instead an attempt to greenwash capitalism.