What part of "You claim to be an expert in a field in which you are completely ignorant" is not a rational response?

You are claiming that all of a field of science is a hoax, driven by politics, and yet you provide no evidence except your unsupported claims.

There is nothing "irrational" about discarding your unsupported claims. It would be irrational to accept your claims without any form of solid proof.

And when your claims are paranoia, that an entire field of science which you have absolutely no knowledge of, training in, accreditation in, or publication in is a hoax, it's doubly rational.

The only people who deny the truth of anthropogenic climate change are American Republicans - a tiny group of people. YOU are the one doing this for political reasons.

Again, you provide no evidence - just a bunch of unsupported paranoid claims. It shows how little you understand the scientific method that you think your empty claims in a field you don't understand are more important than all the world's scientists, and to be honest, it shows a tenuous relationship with reality.