I wouldn't classify myself as a denier at all. The theory itself makes some sense. Only the significance is uncertain. But that's a huge, and important uncertainty.
I've seen that every time you get into one of these debates you throw around labels like "Denier" to anyone and everyone who says anything resembling "We're not sure yet if the sky is falling or not"
It's a heretical/orthodoxy test. And one based on a need to shout down all opposing ideas. Anathema to Science. And exactly what Von Storch is talking about when he talks about "preachers"
If he keeps his eyes open, as Von Storch does, a scientist's perception can change based on observation. Data over the last 15 years has seriously called into question large assumptions made beforehand. It's not unreasonable to proceed with caution on world-bending regulation in the face of such uncertainty.
Stating that obviousness doesn't make one a "Denier." It's just as likely that they're being realists, and you're in your own denial state.