It is like the game of whack-a-mole. No matter how many times you whack them down, they just pop up again. Here try this, it is a lot more productive than whacking the deniers.<quoted text>
There it is. The denier argument on a nutshell. Every point is wrong. Every point has been rebutted. Every rebuttal has been rejected. I count five.
1) "We're skeptics. Skepticism is good." There are clear differences between proper skepticism and denial that have been presented many times.
2) "The science should claim certainty before action is warranted." Fails on two counts; both revealed many times. Science never deals in proof or certainty. Demanding it before taking action is illogical in any case. If this semipro liar actually meant to imply that there is significant doubt within the field, he's simply lying. The truth has been revealed many times.
3) "Climate science = only models." Big Lie. Revealed as such many times.
4) "The science is shaky." Actually, the science is very robust. I have personally explained several ways that it is, some of which you assiduously avoid even acknowledging.
5) "Scientists are going off half cocked; it needs more study." It's been studied for decades by many, many scientists, with high tech research tools from the likes of NASA, etc. and by some for well over a century. The latest report by the climate researchers bumped the confidence level for anthropogenic, catastrophic warming from 90 to 95%. This matches the level of certainty that smoking causes lung cancer and exceeds the confidence level universally applied in medicine and public health matters. Also, the science has also shown the effects of delaying action.
All this information has been rejected by the denial industry as well. Congrats on so clearly stating the vacuous nature of denialist.