Skepquote of the day
But real skeptics still accept a preponderance of carefully examined evidence even when some elements of a complex systems problem remain unresolved, and they do not pretend that when there are loose ends some well-established preponderances don’t exist — that is beyond skepticism to denial, or often political convenience. So a skeptic questions everything but accepts what the preponderance of evidence is, and a denier falsely claims that until all aspects are resolved we know nothing and should do nothing-often motivated by the latter. If you deny a clear preponderance of evidence, you have crossed the line from legitimate skeptic to idoelogical denier.
Stephen H. Schneider – Skeptical Inquirer, may-June 2009, Vol 33, Issue 3, Page 16