“(the validity of the scientific process, the risk related to the likelihood and impact of action or inaction, the economic implications of action or non-action, and the myriad ideological issues around personal freedom, the proper role and size of government, and others)” One right in the middle, pragmatic action, was missed which that I think is important. There is more responsible action that can be taken with only a minimal amount of compromise required. If a more complete agreement is not likely, you look to smaller compromises.
The divide of 35% to 75% highlights a major issue which is best described as the “Di-hydrogen Monoxide Syndrome”. You can’t reason your way around irrational beliefs or fears of the congregation, only the preacher can convince his flock, if they can be convinced.