While scientific evidence and consensus is substantial with increasing certainty over time, it is difficult to understand the continued existence of denials. To answer this question, it is important to use the motives of climate denial. One major reason could be misinformation to public and lack of understanding of scientific principles. Others are special interests associated with industries and groups that gain from GHG emissions. Time scale of decisions is another factors: most deniers look at short time frames compared to longer time scales of climatic processes.

Climate change is real. The development of climate is complex in the sense that it encompasses socio-economic issues that are mainly driven by leaders who are in most cases politicians. Hence, the aspect of denial comes in since politicians have to drive their agenda(s) regardless of whether they conform to the reality of climate or not.

Check out for details from 'Climate change and power: Isn’t it all about politics?' by David Manuel-Navarrete

The global fossil fuel industry has much to lose if the world's nations really do something about climate change--apart from hand wringing. In Australia, the coal industry has influence in the ruling Liberal Party. In the US, some of the climate skeptic organisations have been funded by fossil fuel industries. As Al Gore put it, climate change is 'an inconvenient truth'.

I have just asked a question on this platform on pretty much the same matter (climate change Skeptics) and it has generated a healthy discussion which you might also be interested in.

To check what I wrote and how others have written, read https://www.researchgate.net/post/Climate_Change_Skepticism_does_exists_but_is_it_fine

Climate change is a reality

politics and politians' personal career prospects keep this debate largely on.

I agree with most of the answers, in my opinion its not the complexity of understanding climate change. I mean what's so complex about melting icebergs, extreme weathers, more stronger forest fires than ever, rising sea levels etc. the main culprit here is finance/economics i.e. the monetary sacrifice which is seen as a potential threat to huge profits made by organizations, countries etc.

I don't want to be political here but you really think that America pulling out of 'Paris accord' is because 'Donald trump' not understanding the climate change or it is more or less associated with monetary sacrifices associated with cleaner environment?

Thank you for the responses but it still seems to be a hypothetical issue to me..

Sir Kenneth, are you trying to say that we human cannot do anything to change the earths climate? ( I did not understand that line)

Yes sir Kenneth i am aware of the plan but if we only think about the plan created i think it will be a contradictory issue but also i believe there must be some way by which we can efficiently work on that and bring positive outcomes.

Climate change is real and there is no denying. But, what w can do to delay or stop it is what is being debated