I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.
Climate deniers are less immoral than Holocaust deniers, although they are undoubtedly more dangerous.
There are many more traits that the climate deniers share with the creationists and Holocaust deniers and others who distort the truth.
There are bound to be deniers. Whenever you set up a thesis there's bound to be somebody who comes the opposite way …like Holocaust deniers.
Creationists and Holocaust deniers are both very similar - both are denying what is a perfectly manifest fact. In the case of Holocaust deniers it's more recent history, but in both cases the evidence - in favour of the Holocaust and evolution - is simply overwhelming. That doesn't mean they are morally or politically equivalent. But they are equivalent in denying history.
The climate-change deniers are rapidly ending up with as much intellectual credibility as creationists and Flat Earthers. They are nudging close to having the moral credibility of Holocaust deniers.
Look at the global warming issue. Why are the left so angry? They appear to be getting everything they want. The Pope's on their side. Big governments are on their side. The United Nations is on their side, but we aren't and they're lived. And who do they focus on? The deniers. And who are they trying to destroy? The deniers. They cannot tolerate. They will not tolerate. They cannot handle dissent. They don't want it.
Faced with the evidence, many deniers have started to admit that global warming is real, but argue that humans have little or nothing to do with it.
I … noticed something striking about my growing cast of deniers. None of them were deniers.
The obvious reductio ad absurdum is Holocaust deniers: Should their perspective be provided, for "balance," any time someone writes about the Holocaust?
The trouble is that the hockey stick graph become an icon and deniers reckoned if they could smash the icon, the whole concept of global warming would be destroyed with it.
The Holocaust deniers, some say it never happened. But more say, "Oh, yeah, millions were killed, but it wasn't directed at the Jews. They didn't suffer specially compared to anybody else." They try to downplay it.
An Inconvenient Truth is so convincing that it makes opposers of the argument as credible as Holocaust deniers.
I don't like being called a denier because deniers don't believe in facts. There are no facts linking the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide with imminent catastrophic global warming there are only predictions based on complex computer models.
Fifteen per cent of the population believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona and somewhat fewer still believe the Earth is flat. I think they all get together with the global warming deniers on a Saturday night and party
I do think it's often a mistake to call them climate skeptics. I think they're deniers, just as I think president Ahmadinejad of iran who claims not to believe that the Holocaust occurred.