The study examines the political polarization of climate change beliefs and the impact of climate interventions across 60 countries. Key findings include: 1. **Political Polarization**: Liberal individuals reported stronger beliefs in climate change and supported climate policies more than conservative individuals (Cohen’s *d* = 0.35 and 0.27, respectively). However, there was no significant difference in behavioral tree planting tasks between liberals and conservatives. 2. **Belief-Beauty Incongruence**: The disconnect between beliefs and behaviors was more pronounced among conservatives, who acted pro-environmental despite their beliefs, rather than liberals who failed to act on their beliefs. 3. **Intervention Effects**: Three interventions (emphasizing effective collective actions, writing a letter to a future generation, and writing a letter from the future self) boosted climate beliefs and policy support across the ideological spectrum. One intervention (emphasizing scientific consensus) increased climate action among liberals. 4. **Conservative-Oriented Green Gap**: The study suggests a conservative-oriented green gap, where interventions targeting conservatives may be more effective in increasing climate action. 5. **Implications for Practitioners**: The findings highlight the need for targeted interventions that consider ideological differences to effectively promote climate awareness and action. The study provides global evidence of the complex relationship between political ideology and climate change beliefs, policy support, and individual climate action, offering insights for policymakers and climate communicators.The study examines the political polarization of climate change beliefs and the impact of climate interventions across 60 countries. Key findings include: 1. **Political Polarization**: Liberal individuals reported stronger beliefs in climate change and supported climate policies more than conservative individuals (Cohen’s *d* = 0.35 and 0.27, respectively). However, there was no significant difference in behavioral tree planting tasks between liberals and conservatives. 2. **Belief-Beauty Incongruence**: The disconnect between beliefs and behaviors was more pronounced among conservatives, who acted pro-environmental despite their beliefs, rather than liberals who failed to act on their beliefs. 3. **Intervention Effects**: Three interventions (emphasizing effective collective actions, writing a letter to a future generation, and writing a letter from the future self) boosted climate beliefs and policy support across the ideological spectrum. One intervention (emphasizing scientific consensus) increased climate action among liberals. 4. **Conservative-Oriented Green Gap**: The study suggests a conservative-oriented green gap, where interventions targeting conservatives may be more effective in increasing climate action. 5. **Implications for Practitioners**: The findings highlight the need for targeted interventions that consider ideological differences to effectively promote climate awareness and action. The study provides global evidence of the complex relationship between political ideology and climate change beliefs, policy support, and individual climate action, offering insights for policymakers and climate communicators.