Have you noticed how a word can go from having positive connotations to negative ones? Or from an attribute to be proud of to one to be ashamed of?
A while ago I read a book by Theodore Dalrymple in which he described the changing meaning of the word – discriminate.
Once to discriminate was seen as a sign of intelligence and wisdom. Now it is associated with being bigoted, close minded, stupid.
The word Skeptic is following a similar path.

Jo Nova, a freelance science presenter & writer, wrote this:

I’ve done it, I’ve finally solved the dilemma of how to refer to scientists who actively promote a crisis due to carbon, but can’t provide the evidence that carbon causes major warming. Not Team-AGW, not alarmist, A far better one has come to me.

Once upon a time, a scientist and a skeptic used to be one and the same thing. Actually, it still is. The motto of The Royal Society — the longest lived scientific association in the world, is Nullius in Verba — “On no one’s word” (take no one’s word for it). The Climate Industry marketing has tried to turn “skeptic” into a dirty word. So in perfect symmetry, if we are Skeptical Scientists, they are obviously:

the Unskeptical Scientists

(or “Unskeptics” for short).

What could be more appropriate?

It covers all bases; is true to its form, and if you think being a skeptic is so unattractive, it’s flattering —right? I can see them queuing up now to print the badges proclaiming themselves as the proud people who are not skeptics. So in the spirit of helpfulness I’ve done them up their very own T-Shirt and Badge —copyright free.

I’m a proud skeptic. For the opposite of skeptical surely is gullible?