Any other scientists in a 'pure' research topic like me have probably had this experience talking with a layperson: "What do you do?" "I study the strong force (or some other long explanation)" "What can you do with that?" ".......?"

What I mean to say is that for the bulk of the population^1, science is little more than a means of building new tools. Science gives us the computer and the airplane and roombas. They just simply don't understand that a lot of scientists just honestly want to know how the world works. I think it is this mindset that sets the stage for denying scientific concepts in our world.

If science is a means to a new tool, than every scientific discovery is immediately followed by the question of what new tool it is introducing and what it's replacing. When scientists find evidence of climate change and evidence that it's linked to human activities, people don't see it as some quest for truth, they see the scientists as trying to overthrow the old fossil fuel industry and replace it with industry of their own. When scientists find evidence of evolution, people don't think scientists just really want to know the history of life, people think scientists are out to overthrow the religions and sell humanism instead.

This could be really easily tested, and I would love to see it done. See if there is a strong correlation between "science is a quest for truth or a quest for tools" and AGW and evolution denialism.

edit¹ : GordonKnott correctly pointed out that it was wrong for me to say the bulk of the population. Absolutely. I'm really only offering a hypothesis here. I lack any data to support the claim beyond anecdote.