I'm not a Denier, I'm a Skeptic

And yes, there is a difference

In #science

In this tumultuous time, it is important to not demonize people who disagree with you. It is also important to recognize that people can have nuanced views on complex subjects. Calling someone a denier when they have such views is not constructive. For example, from "Making (non)sense of climate denial" we have:

Scientists agree that surface temperatures have increased since 1880, humans are adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, and carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have a warming effect on the planet. However there is considerable disagreement about the most consequential issues:

  • Whether the warming since 1950 has been dominated by human causes
  • How much the planet will warm in the 21st century
  • Whether warming is ‘dangerous’

This seems pretty reasonable to me, and is basically the view that I have. I have seen a lot of overblown attribution to climate (e.g. polar bears, more frequent hurricanes, more intense tornadoes, etc...). On the other hand, I've heard some ridiculous anti-climate change statements (e.g. it's cold outside now in New England therefore no climate change; people couldn't possible be influential enough to change the climate).

We must be vigilant to explore each claim, evaluate it on its own, and come closer to the truth which may indeed be messy. We need to be open to messy, nuanced positions.