Which kind of climate emergency denier are you?

My previous post, about why some people, particularly men of a certain age, find Greta Thunberg so annoying, prompted a number of climate change deniers to comment on the article.

More than half a century of climate change denial, fed by various powerful lobbies, has been swallowed whole by idiots who, for various reasons, insist there’s nothing to worry about. You have to be pretty stupid to continue denying climate change in the face of the evidence, but just how many types climate change deniers are out there? Which dumb excuses do these so-called skeptics use to justify their denial of reality?

The first, and undoubtedly the most abundant, is the flat out denial of the evidence of what we can see around us. This is the result of all those lobbyists’ years of hard work spreading lies and casting doubt on the evidence. These characters like to talk about “unproven hypotheses” (when, in reality, there is total consensus among the scientific community), who refer to press articles quoting “dissidents” (in reality, laypeople expressing an opinion) or even authors who have been properly categorized as academically dishonest. They insist that “scientists have been wrong before”, when the reality is that models from half a century ago already correctly predicted the current climate emergency. These geniuses also like to play the victim on…