re: #300 windsagio

I think ‘skeptic’ can become a codeword, especially in places where outright denying AGW is unacceptable (for instance, here :p) Being a denier gets you in trouble, being a ‘skeptic’ both increases your credibility and shields you from criticism.

So anyone who questions any part of AGW is a “denier”

Are there any degrees of ‘denial”, or does it matter

What if someone totally agrees that the earth is warming, that it’s mostly caused by man made CO 2 and that there will be problems, BUT,, they don’t think that Chicago will be underwater

Same degree as someone who states flat out that not only is the earth NOt warming, it’s cooling!?!?!