New Scientist has just publish a massive op-ed series Special report: Living in denial, which I honestly find offensive.
Whatever they are denying, denial movements have much in common with one another, not least the use of similar tactics (see "How to be a denialist"). All set themselves up as courageous underdogs fighting a corrupt elite engaged in a conspiracy to suppress the truth or foist a malicious lie on ordinary people. This conspiracy is usually claimed to be promoting a sinister agenda: the nanny state, takeover of the world economy, government power over individuals, financial gain, atheism. Living in denial: Why sensible people reject the truth
My reply to the "New Scientist"
We are not the underdogs here, we are the people who are going to pay the U$trillions in taxes, fees and cost increases and try to survive in a drastically altered economic world. People are starving to death right now, many more are surviving only because of the charitable goodwill of people in the industrialized countries. When it gets to the point that I have to choose between feeding myself or someone who was born in a third world country, well I'm sorry about their luck. When climatology was just Ivory Tower mental masturbation, it was OK that the degree of certainty was on the dodgy side, now that we are talking about trillions of dollars and lives of millions, the certainty required of your data and conclusions from it go up dramatically. You are coming to me with your hand out, you have the burden of proof and you have to convince me to my standards, not yours; and calling me pejoratives doesn't enhance your chances .