There comes a point when a skeptic becomes a contrarian or worse a denialist. Case in point: global warming. How does one find what real skeptics think about global warming? Googling doesn’t help. There’s too much noise.
I suppose my starting point would be Skeptical Inquirer or The Skeptic and to look at what well respected skeptics have to say on the matter. But in the end it isn’t their opinion that matters. What matters are their critical skills that a lay person can use to sort out the evidence and the science. As a lay person I can’t go drill ice cores and measure trace amounts of gas. I can’t examine sediment cores or tree rings. I don’t have time to sort out existing temperature records or greenhouse gas measurements over time.

I think the term skeptic has picked up some negative connotations. In that it is a philosophy that rejects everything. I would like to see myself as a rationalist. Someone who strives to look at the world and science in manner that helps to build up a better picture of the world. The problem is anytime anyone comes up with a useful descriptive term it gets co-opted by assholes. And it gets redefined into meaning the exact opposite of what it’s supposed to be or into meaning whatever they want it to mean. It becomes white noise. They aren’t assholes. They are cocksuckers.