originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: Flatfish
So why use that name?
Why not Anthropogenic Climate Change Deniers?
The reason people don't use the term "anthropogenic climate change deniers" is simply because that's a lot of syllables. Nothing more to it than
I think you're getting way too hung up on semantics.
In fact I don't even hear the term "climate change deniers" very often - it's usually just "climate deniers". So I hope that doesn't mean you
think people deny the existence of climate altogether as well??
Anyway as for the term being thrown around as a pejorative - well, it's unfortunate, but sometimes you also have to call a spade a spade. There is
absolutely nothing wrong with being a skeptic, it's a wonderful and totally revered thing in science.
But there are so many phony skeptics, phony skeptic talking points, and so much phony skeptic "science" in the climate debate that the term denier
becomes entirely justified, like it or not.
Personally I think deniers are called deniers not because of the fact that they deny climate, or climate change, or anthropogenic climate change, or
whatever amount of syllables you want to put in front there - they get called deniers because of the way they deny the evidence
anthropogenic climate change.
You see it in every single one of these discussions (and there are plenty of examples in this very thread). These so-called skeptics will make some
totally ignorant claim, about how there's absolutely no evidence that CO2 causes warming for example, or that it's all based on hypothetical
computer models, or that one volcano emits more CO2 than all humans ever have - and then when somebody delivers the evidence that refutes these
completely manufactured talking points, they just...deny it.
They either ignore that evidence, or move the goal posts, or quickly change the subject to the next meme, or nitpick trivial details that deliberately
avoid the bigger picture, or just flat out DENY it - with no counter-evidence to support their entirely baseless rejection.
This happens over and over and over again on these threads. But deniers tend to be so obtuse about it, and lack any semblance of self-awareness over
their very blatant denial, that they just repeat the same pattern endlessly, and then usually cry about how much they're being persecuted for their
supposedly innocent skeptical interjections.
So you may be sick of being called a denier when you feel you're just being a humble skeptic, but personally I'm sick of all the deniers hiding
behind the term "skeptic", when they don't even know the meaning of the word.
If you feel you're being wrongly lumped into that group then just do your best to disassociate yourself from them first, and I guarantee you it
get noticed, and it will be very much appreciated. Because real
skeptics are like an absolute breath of fresh air in this mostly
phony debate. But please don't pretend like deniers don't exist either - because they completely poison and pollute this debate way more than
anyone, or any word.