Originally Posted by Frank101
The term denier is thrown around too much. What about us skeptics who rightfully questions methodology and incentives of scientists? Throwing the term denier around at anyone who doesn't 100% agree with man made global warming is throwing a negative connotation on another person's opposing views. Much like calling global warming believers as alarmists.
I have a specific meaning for a denialist, and it's not limited to AGW. Maybe this meaning is just in my head, in which case my bad. But to me, a denialist is someone who is absolutely, positively, 100 % sure of something, without having enough evidence to be able to realistically take that stance, and dismisses any counterargument usually with ridicule. This could apply to any number of subjects. Note being 100% sure of something isn't enough to be a denialist. Just having someone disagree with you isn't enough. But yeah, it's quite possible to start labelling people denialists just because they've failed to concede your argument. Of course it's possible to heap any number of insults on someone for that "crime".
I know people who don't believe that AGW is the problem that the AGW lobby claims, but I don't consider them denialists because A) They admit to not being 100% sure, B) They admit that there is evidence in favour of AGW, and C) they are willing to discuss the issue, concede the occasional point, etc.
Of course in the case of AGW, you've got people being hired by the Koch bros to be denialists, and I make no apology for holding those
people in contempt.