One of the biggest Climate Change Denialists, Bjorn Lomborg, (well he wasn't a denialist per se because he admitted it was happening but he claimed there was nothing we could do about it) has changed his mind and is going to advocate that the world seriously invest billions of dollars per year to combat climate change.
It seems to me that Bjorn Lomborg got over his Western/European lifestyle and psychological denial that resulted from it.
I've noticed that a handful of people that I know that are climate change deniers (I know 2 personally) resulted from the incompatibility of their political ideology with reality. 1 is an engineer and the other a molecular scientist. Their reluctance to accept climate change comes from their stance as (big L) Libertarians, they were so blinded by their ideologies that they cherry picked all the evidence to claim that Climate Change was all a big hoax. (The engineer tried to go about the angle that science doesn't really know all that much and he based this on some friend of his who was a science PhD candidate and told him that the deeper you go the less certain "established" science is which is hypocritical I may add because he recently decried the devaluing of science from New Agey lefty types.)
In naming this post I realize that the media makes a big mistake in calling Climate Change Denialists "skeptics". Skepticism as I have come to understand it from Skeptic and New Atheist movement is a far leap away from denialism (which it often addresses) and cynicism. Skepticism is just holding out for good evidence to form a valid idea or claim, it is NOT digging your heals in the sand denying evidence that is inconvenient to you. Actually true skeptics who practice what they preach are probably more accepting of inconvenient truths than the average person.