<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for ‘Climate change’ is climate change by any other name]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by amazingdrx http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/ Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:31:21 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/1 Global climate disaster

I have been campaigning (through my own personal think tank, hehey) for years to switch "global warming" to "global climate disaster".  

The "warming" part of the usual phrase is a convenient wing nut target evertyime it gets cold outside.  

We ought to explain it this way, add too much energy, in the form of trapped solar heat, and the climate becomes ever more volatile.  

Storms more extreme, droughts more protracted, temperature swings wilder, ice melts quicker, this is a better way and phrase, global climate disaster, to describe the massive firestorms in the future with this status quo global energy and agricultural economy.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]> Global climate disaster

I have been campaigning (through my own personal think tank, hehey) for years to switch "global warming" to "global climate disaster".  

The "warming" part of the usual phrase is a convenient wing nut target evertyime it gets cold outside.  

We ought to explain it this way, add too much energy, in the form of trapped solar heat, and the climate becomes ever more volatile.  

Storms more extreme, droughts more protracted, temperature swings wilder, ice melts quicker, this is a better way and phrase, global climate disaster, to describe the massive firestorms in the future with this status quo global energy and agricultural economy.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]> Comment #2 by jestbill http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/ Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:49:05 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/2 wingnuts

I agree that "warming" makes a convenient target but think that we need ways to identify wings however they try to camouflage their "nut" status.

The answer to the question posed by the article is simply that the easiest way to avoid losing an argument is to change the subject.

If people start arguing over terminology, they'll be out of the "disaster" argument and more easily dismissed as elitist, egghead, cranks.

Where have all the horses gone?

]]> wingnuts

I agree that "warming" makes a convenient target but think that we need ways to identify wings however they try to camouflage their "nut" status.

The answer to the question posed by the article is simply that the easiest way to avoid losing an argument is to change the subject.

If people start arguing over terminology, they'll be out of the "disaster" argument and more easily dismissed as elitist, egghead, cranks.

Where have all the horses gone?

]]> Comment #3 by endependence http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/ Sat, 10 Jan 2009 10:39:21 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/3 All they have is propoganda and spin

The salient point of "eco" words falling out of fashion is that the deniers have nothing but words to argue over.

What if carbon dioxide is not leading to global warming, how could toxic coal ash, mercury, nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide and all of the other "baddies" that come with fossil fuel use justify our continued reliance on them?  Can you read "big business" on the wall?

This is a great video about where the deniers come from.  It is 40 minutes long, but it is all we need to know about the "other side" of the argument (including some great footage of the Orwellian Frank Luntz).

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/video.html

We are waging a war for "endependence" = energy independence that ends dependence on polluting fuels.

Find out more at http://endependence.info

]]> All they have is propoganda and spin

The salient point of "eco" words falling out of fashion is that the deniers have nothing but words to argue over.

What if carbon dioxide is not leading to global warming, how could toxic coal ash, mercury, nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide and all of the other "baddies" that come with fossil fuel use justify our continued reliance on them?  Can you read "big business" on the wall?

This is a great video about where the deniers come from.  It is 40 minutes long, but it is all we need to know about the "other side" of the argument (including some great footage of the Orwellian Frank Luntz).

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/video.html

We are waging a war for "endependence" = energy independence that ends dependence on polluting fuels.

Find out more at http://endependence.info

]]> Comment #4 by juliejohns http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/ Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:57:13 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/Global-warming-deniers-and-the-English-language/4 Its a bit sad that the deniers seem to mainly pick on the phrase "global warming" as one of their main arguments. As mentioned above, propoganda and spin is all they seem to have.

]]> Its a bit sad that the deniers seem to mainly pick on the phrase "global warming" as one of their main arguments. As mentioned above, propoganda and spin is all they seem to have.

]]>