Are realists really making the AGW denier/Holocaust denier link?

Well, "abrasive" is an improvement over some of your prior comments about me! :)

Your premise is also correct that "denier" used in connection with purveyors of anti-science disinformation about climate change is only very rarely meant to infer a connection, or even make any comparison or cross reference whatever, between Holocaust denial and AGW denial.

I personally think there are some very significant similarities between the two, along with more than a few significant differences, of course, but I'd say that over 99% of the time when I use "denier" I mean the standard dictionary definition of the word, nothing more, nothing less.

"Frequently, when someone refers to those who reject AGW as deniers or denialists, someone who rejects AGW will be complaining about that person comparing them to those who deny the holocaust. But the only person who does not reject AGW that I've seen actually make that link in any way is Hey Dook"

I have frequently made the comparison, and it is a fair comparison.

You are once again falling over yourself to show you are a "moderate".

EDIT

"Liberals are quite adept at planting a negative term and then lying about the intent.....throwing their hands up and crying..."We didn't mean it that way".....you know the drill. Such tactics (name-calling) are acts of deperation when an individual/organization are unable to defend a position."

He engages in name calling against liberals...and then tells us that people who engage in name calling are never in a position to make valid arguments.

A realist might notice that wherever a law exists to prevent someone from researching a phenomenon, a conspiracy may be present. Europe has many such laws regarding the Halocaust. Also, deviating even slightly from the official story, for instance by saying that perhaps only 3 million Jews died, constitutes complete denial. This also makes people suspicious. However, it seems very likely that a Halocaust against Jews occurred, since these are a racist people who tend to invade countries and interfere with politics. That might piss someone off eventually. And many genocides occurred in the 20th century.

AGW has no such conspiracy.

This is a clear attempt by these science deniers to paint themselves as victims and realists as evil, because they have no science whatsoever to stand on. It is meant as nothing but a distraction, and as such, has had a little success in that we spend some time talking about this absurd nonsense instead of their climate nonsense. In basketball, their tactic is known as a "flop". It is nothing more than deliberate lying in an attempt to damage "the other team".

As far as I'm concerned, the use of the term 'denier' was/is intended to cast those who question the credibility of the global warming claim, in a negative light. Liberals are quite adept at planting a negative term and then lying about the intent.....throwing their hands up and crying..."We didn't mean it that way".....you know the drill.

Such tactics (name-calling) are acts of deperation when an individual/organization are unable to defend a position.

I've become accustomed to such grade-school antics and am not really bothered by it.....only disgusted that people resort to it.

The only ones making that link is the 'deniers'. When I call someone a denier am I equating them to a holocaust denier? No. they are an 'anthropogenic climate change' denier. And by this, I mean they ignore much of the science that shows such things as a doubling of CO2 by itself amounts to a 1C increase in temperatures without any feedbacks. Instead of actively learning the science they choose to read blogs and news articles telling them what to think. This is something 'realists' have been accused of yet they are the ones doing it. I think it's extremely pathetic how they attempt to argue in this fashion.

Take BB for example. Though they have been told time and time again what is meant by the word 'denial' they are still sticking to their guns and stating that it is all due to grade-school name calling. What BB is accusing others of doing, that being acts of desperation, is exactly what those that side with their side do. When I call someone an anthropogenic climate change denier do I mean they are denying the holocaust? Of course not. I've often attempted to change my way of speech in here to accomodate such arguments but frankly it's getting tiring. They just find something else to complain about that has nothing to do with the topic. I swear I must be married to you all.

On top of that, realists have regularly been called commies, idiots, and so on in here. If there is anyone doing the name calling it is the 'deniers'. Yet they attempt to try and state that they are the innocent ones who are being called names. It's pretty laughable actually.

I'm not, I doubt that few of those that deny AGW also deny the Jewish Holocaust. I have no problem with the word "denier" (and neither do John Coleman or William Gray), but for most of them I think the word "liar" is more appropriate.

The word "denier" is someone who denies and was around long before the Nazi Holocaust.

I don't care what you call me. I have been called worse by people superior to anyone on this site. (And they have been proven wrong.) But I know that I am a great person, my wife tells me that, so I listen to her. It is one of the many times I say, "Yes Dear!"

Yes, this was pointed out, not by me, on this site by a true scientist, and it was admitted to.

It's the denialists that claim the realist do so. They are trying to play the victim, since there is no science on their side. All they can do is lie