Believers calling skeptics "deniers" - does that reflect more on believers or skeptics? ?

Question

When the facts are on your side, argue the facts - when they aren't, then you engage in namecalling?

Answer 1

Personally, I feel the term 'denier' is more accurate than 'skeptic'.  A skeptical mind leaves room for doubt.  There is no doubt that global warming is a scam.  

Answer 2

The English language has many words with similar meanings yet they are different, with slightly different meanings. I try and use these words appropriately and do not consider any of them to be pejorative hence would 'deny' that I engage in namecalling (at least in this situation)!

I use the term 'denier' when the person is clearly in denial of facts or truth or constantly denies them. This, unfortunately, is very common in this forum with many asking things (e.g. 'proof') and, when presented with an answer, deny that answer.

Denial is an emotional response.

I use the term 'sceptic' when a person has obviously done some research (even if just reading an article) and the results or logic of that research has failed to convince them of the arguments therein.

Scepticism is a rational response.

Our understanding of the universe, or any part of it, is never absolute. It usually starts with a hunch, a feeling, and slowly, as more knowledge and understanding is collected, the hunch slides along a continuum towards accepted reality ("truth"). Different people will personally accept a thing as real or truthful at different points along that continuum. This reflects the point at which their scepticism ("doubt") changes to "beyond reasonable doubt".

This is the same as belief hence I use the term "believer" and "non-believer" as shorthand for people who have or have not been swayed by the knowledge beyond reasonable doubt and have thus accepted a thing as true.

Finally, recognising the undesired religious connotations of "believer" I often use the term "proponent" as an alternative but only where the person involved has demonstrated an active desire to help people understand their world view.

I have yet to think of a similar term for a non-believer who has demonstrated an active desire to help people understand their world view, perhaps because there aren't too many of them ("active" meaning putting forward rational arguments supported by credible sources).

Answer 3

I believe there is a difference between a denier and a skeptic--a denier believes that CO2 has no effect or it's effect is insignificant, while a skeptic acknowledges CO2's significance, but also acknowledges the large unknowns and their potential significance.

"Personally, I feel the term 'denier' is more accurate than 'skeptic'. A skeptical mind leaves room for doubt. There is no doubt that global warming is a scam."

You certainly are a denier, davem, and it isn't a good thing.

Answer 4

It reflects reality.  If you're denying basic science, you're in denial and are a denier.

Answer 5

I am not sure exactly what you are asking. I think it is wise to question everything. I guess that makes me a skeptic, but I believe there is such thing as truth and I continually seek it. If I find flaws, I reject the flaws and accept the rest until it manifests itself otherwise. It is a continual quest.

Answer 6

I shrug it off, when the basic questions are unanswered, that makes me dig all the harder.

Answer 7

There will always be believers there will always be dis-believers, who cares! Others are out there trying there up-most to try & change the current day issues, for the benefit of all who are concerned...So quite your complaining!

Answer 8

I think it shows that believers aren't willing to debate the issue, perhaps because they know they'll lose. This is the same sort of thing that happens when believers call anyone who has evidence against AGW as being 'in the pocket of the oil companies'. In fact you could go so far as to say that the believers are denialists since they try to smudge evidence and silence all opposition to them. It's time this issue was taken out of politics and back into science so we can look at the facts and not biased opinion.