APP - SuperFreak

[zappasguitar]

One question...

No Games.

No Evasion.

No answering a question with a question.

Why is it so important that you get the following question answered?

"WHY is it that the global warming fear mongers have now switched to calling it 'climate change'? If MAN is causing WARMING... and it is 'unequivocal scientific fact'... WHY the change?"

What do you hope to prove?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

One question...

No Games.

No Evasion.

No answering a question with a question.

Why is it so important that you get the following question answered?

"WHY is it that the global warming fear mongers have now switched to calling it 'climate change'? If MAN is causing WARMING... and it is 'unequivocal scientific fact'... WHY the change?"

What do you hope to prove?

I do not hope to 'prove' anything.... I would like it answered so that I can understand the reasoning behind the change.

Why would they change from decades of MAN CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING to Climate Change?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I do not hope to 'prove' anything.... I would like it answered so that I can understand the reasoning behind the change.

Why would they change from decades of MAN CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING to Climate Change?

I believe it's because they saw that their agenda of putting all the blame on mankind was failing, since most people have access to the information and weren't buying into it; so they had to change the agenda title and hope they could still sell it, by toning it down, because they found that to many people found it offensive and that the "warmers" were idiots for trying to make it appear that mankind was the sole reason.

 

[Cypress]

One question...

No Games.

No Evasion.

No answering a question with a question.

Why is it so important that you get the following question answered?

"WHY is it that the global warming fear mongers have now switched to calling it 'climate change'? If MAN is causing WARMING... and it is 'unequivocal scientific fact'... WHY the change?"

What do you hope to prove?

To be fair, this is a "question" that Dixie, et al. also yelp out frequently.

The reason is that these dudes read something on a rightwing blog that lead them to believe that liberals "changed" the name from global warming to climate change, for some nefarious reason. A reason which is unfathomable to me, but in the wingnutosphere it apparently has near-mythological significance, and appears to imply some sort of plotting, conspiracy, or liberal sneakiness.

The fact of the matter is it's always been called Climate Change by scientists, world governments, and policy makers.

Here's the 1990 International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 1st assessment report from 20 years ago. IPCC is the world's foremost scientific body, constituted and convened by all the governments of the world, to assess climate change.

"Global warming" is just a word used frequently in the media and in everyday lexicon.

However, since the advent of modern climate science, scientists and governments have been fully aware that climate change involves more than just rising temperatures. It involves increasing extreme weather conditions, droughts, increasing sea level rise, and a host of other environmental factors than influence not only weather and environment, but also a range of socio-economic conditions.

That's why, from a science perspective and policy perspective, it's been called "Cliimate Change" for decades by scientists, the world's governments, and by policy makers.




EDIT: Update - The fact is, this issue has been called "Climate Change" since even before the 1990 IPCC assessment.

The UN SCOPE 29 report in 1986 was the first worldwide assessment by world governments and world scientists to begin to assess Climate Change and green house gas emission.

"SCOPE 29 - The Greenhouse Effect, Climatic Change, and Ecosystems"

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf

Thread Summary: The issue has been called Climate Change for a quarter of a century by the world's governments, the world's scientists, and the world's policy makers.


Unfortunately, Dixie, et al., have been duped again into believing there's some weird, nefarious, and imaginary sneaky liberal conspiracy to hoodwink church-going conservatives by interchangeably using the worlds "Climate Change" and "Global Warming".


As Zap suggested, why exactly this is some sort of horrifying liberal plot in the minds of Church-going and blog-reading Cons, is a mystery to the enlightened and educated crowd.

THREAD TAKE-AWAY LESSON


Zap, this is why whenever a rightwing yelps out a random question, they expect you to automatically accept the premise or merit of the question. But, really, you shouldn't. You can waste a lot of time on that.

For example, they might yelp out "Explain why liberals changed the name "global warming" to "climate change"!??!!"...(wrong, liberals didn't....that's what it's always been called - Climate Change - at the highest levels of science and government for decades)....

or they might yelp out...."Explain why Sceptics were SHUT OUT of the Climate Gate Russel Meir Report!!!....(factually wrong: The Russel Meirs report explicitly solicited and accepted many submissions and statements from "skeptics")

Unless you want to waste a lot of time going round and round on things that are BS, or just factually wrong, I suggest you ask Cons what the basis and evidence is to support any "questions" they yelp out.

Specifically, on climate science. They are easily duped by their blogs on things like Climate Gate, Amazon Gate, and temperature records.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I thought "global warming" was used to imply that climate change was something man made instead of what it actually was......

 

[Cypress]

I thought "global warming" was used to imply that climate change was something man made instead of what it actually was......

That might be because the right wing blogs you read told you that.


For scientists, and for the reasonably well informed, global warming due to human emissions of GHG is just one aspect of climate change. Albeit, probably the most important one, because rapid warming leads to a cascade of other effects and other problems that result, or are related to it.

 

[Cypress]

Also Zap, you can ascribe this to a another hilarious case of conservative projection.

Cons are, and always have been, obsessed with electioneering and the public relations angle of marketing their crackpot ideas. Hello? Changing the name of Social Security Privitization, to Social Security "personal accounts" or "choice", or whatever the f it is this year.

aka, in a hilarious fit of psychological projection they routinely assume that liberals are engaging in the same sort of Newt Gringrich-ish/Frank Luntz-ish type of public marketing nonsense that they do.


I don't care if it's called global warming or climate change. The only thing that matters to me is accuracy. Climate Change is what it has always been called by scientists, governments, and policy makers - for decades. Because it's a more accurate characterization, in a holisitc way, of the nature and scope of the issue. But, global warming, or rapidly rising temperatures - and it's consequential effects - due to human emissions of GHG, is most certainly the core issue.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

That might be because the right wing blogs you read told you that.


For scientists, and for the reasonably well informed, global warming due to human emissions of GHG is just one aspect of climate change. Albeit, probably the most important one, because rapid warming leads to a cascade of other effects and other problems that result, or are related to it.

your mistake was claiming that eliminating human activity would somehow make climate change stop.....

 

[zappasguitar]

I do not hope to 'prove' anything.... I would like it answered so that I can understand the reasoning behind the change.

Why would they change from decades of MAN CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING to Climate Change?

First off, thank you for answering.

Now, notwithstanding Cypress's answer that seems to indicate that at least on some occasions "climate change" has been in use for at least two decades and probably more.

My first guess would be that people who think climate change is occurring realize how many detractors have demonized the phrase "global warming" and turned it into a code phrase for "here comes another nutter".

Also, "global warming", at least to some, seems to indicate that at no time ever will it ever get cold again anywhere on the planet. This belief is demonstrated every year when inevitably, snowfall occurs later in the spring than usual and someone responds facetiously with "but I thought we were going through global warming"?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

from the 1990 report:

The main greenhouse gas,
water vapour, will increase in response to global
warming and further enhance it

There is concern that human activities may be inadvertently
changing the climate of the globe through the enhanced
greenhouse effect, by past and continuing emissions of
carbon dioxide and other gases which will cause the
temperature of the Earth's surface to increase - popularly
termed the "global warming'

they certaintly did nothing to dispel or reject the term, in fact, it is clear they approve of the term and embrace its meaning and use

perhaps cypress should actually read what he links to and stop relying on what left wing blogs tell him to say

 

[zappasguitar]

from the 1990 report:





they certaintly did nothing to dispel or reject the term, in fact, it is clear they approve of the term and embrace its meaning and use

perhaps cypress should actually read what he links to and stop relying on what left wing blogs tell him to say

Of course, RIGHT THERE in Cypress' original post he stated quite clearly that "global warming" is but ONE ASPECT of the larger problem of "climate change". But hey, why should you be bothered by little details like that if it allows you to continue being the uninformed douchebag spouting the same ignorant blather you have for months?

 

[Canceled2]

I do not hope to 'prove' anything.... I would like it answered so that I can understand the reasoning behind the change.

Why would they change from decades of MAN CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING to Climate Change?

"According to the conventional anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory, as human-induced CO2 emissions increase, more surface radiation is absorbed by the atmosphere, with part of it re-radiated to the earth’s surface, resulting in global warming."

It has gone by the wayside because it's bad science. Going back to a simple idea or better stated simple term of "climate change" allows a face saving moment.

Here's an interesting exchange

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

First off, thank you for answering.

No problem. Unlike Cypress, I am not afraid to answer questions posed about my positions.

Now, notwithstanding Cypress's answer that seems to indicate that at least on some occasions "climate change" has been in use for at least two decades and probably more.

I do appreciate Cypress FINALLY answering ONE of the questions. I admit I was unaware of the fact that the IPCC had been using it for that long. What is funny is that after asking for this simple question to be answered 1000 times, this is all Cypess had to provide. Yet he bitched and moaned and developed some 'right wing conspiracy' in his mind for my asking the quesiton.

My first guess would be that people who think climate change is occurring realize how many detractors have demonized the phrase "global warming" and turned it into a code phrase for "here comes another nutter".

I would imagine this has something to do with the media and many fear mongers making the switch. I would add to that the fact that there has been no significant warming for the past 15 years as another reason for the shift. Bottom line, the big push by most fear mongers is that MAN is causing the warming. Hence the AGW theory, the hockey stick etc...

Also, "global warming", at least to some, seems to indicate that at no time ever will it ever get cold again anywhere on the planet. This belief is demonstrated every year when inevitably, snowfall occurs later in the spring than usual and someone responds facetiously with "but I thought we were going through global warming"?

First, I agree, anyone that uses a something like the above, either to promote or detract from the theory that man is causing catastrophic global warming. There will always be places on earth where record cold and warm spells hit. But where the fear mongers theory falters is in the fact that the past 15 years, the earth as a WHOLE has not seen significant warming.

You will find fear mongers like Cypress already chanting that 2010 is 'going to be the warmest year on record'.... he is basing that off of a few months of the year.... yet will at the same time refuse to accept a 15 year period as any sort of example because to him 'it is too short to create a confidence interval.

AS for the panels.... he still plays this game of twisting phrases. I ask for him to tell us WHO was on the panel.... his response...'cons are yelping that no skeptical information was looked at'.... two completely different things.

Why do you suppose he does that?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Of course, RIGHT THERE in Cypress' original post he stated quite clearly that "global warming" is but ONE ASPECT of the larger problem of "climate change". But hey, why should you be bothered by little details like that if it allows you to continue being the uninformed douchebag spouting the same ignorant blather you have for months?

i guess we have to break it down for stupid people like you....i will post it again:

There is concern that human activities may be inadvertently
changing the climate of the globe through the enhanced
greenhouse effect, by past and continuing emissions of
carbon dioxide and other gases which will cause the
temperature of the Earth's surface to increase - popularly
termed the "global warming'

a simple "i was wrong" from you will do

 

[Mott the Hoople]

One question...

No Games.

No Evasion.

No answering a question with a question.

Why is it so important that you get the following question answered?

"WHY is it that the global warming fear mongers have now switched to calling it 'climate change'? If MAN is causing WARMING... and it is 'unequivocal scientific fact'... WHY the change?"

What do you hope to prove?

That's really not a fair question Zappa. It was, in general, lay people of all stripes who have referred to his phenomena as "global warming". For a significant time now climate researchers have referred to this issue as "Anthropogenic Climate Change" as there's a great deal more that's going on then just "global warming.". For example, increased dessertification in sub-Saharan Africa, Ozone depletion over Antartica, decreased rainfall in tropical forest due to deforestation, etc, etc. Increases in global temperatures is just one particular sign of anthropogenic climate change.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

your mistake was claiming that eliminating human activity would somehow make climate change stop.....

I see.....and just who exactly has made that claim? Can you provide links or references?

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I see.....and just who exactly has made that claim? Can you provide links or references?

lol....yes, I reference the last two decades of liberal activity.....if you want to proceed seriously, let me know.....

are you going to pretend the focus of the left has NOT been that human activity is the cause of global warming/climate change and that we needed to seriously alter our activity in order to "SAVE THE WORLD" from global warming......for example, do you remember Kyoto?......

 

[Mott the Hoople]

lol....yes, I reference the last two decades of liberal activity.....if you want to proceed seriously, let me know.....

are you going to pretend the focus of the left has NOT been that human activity is the cause of global warming/climate change and that we needed to seriously alter our activity in order to "SAVE THE WORLD" from global warming......for example, do you remember Kyoto?......

Proceed seriously with you? The most intellectually dishonest partisan poster on this site? That would be a first.

I seriously doubt you know anything about Kyoto you didn't read second hand from some right wing blog but even if you had it would be hard to take you serious as it's patently obvious to virtually everyone here with scientific credentials of your illiteracy in science. But hey, go ahead give it a try. We could use a good laugh.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Proceed seriously with you? The most intellectually dishonest partisan poster on this site? That would be a first.

I seriously doubt you know anything about Kyoto you didn't read second hand from some right wing blog but even if you had it would be hard to take you serious as it's patently obvious to virtually everyone here with scientific credentials of your illiteracy in science. But hey, go ahead give it a try. We could use a good laugh.

it would certainly be the first time you debated me......usually you're busy hiding behind your "ringer" badge........so what is it.....are you seriously pretending the global warming alarmists don't claim that human activity is the cause of global warming?.....you want me to provide references in support of that claim?......should I prove the sky is blue as well?.....

here......I'll cover both for you....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2023835.stm

 

[zappasguitar]

That's really not a fair question Zappa. It was, in general, lay people of all stripes who have referred to his phenomena as "global warming". For a significant time now climate researchers have referred to this issue as "Anthropogenic Climate Change" as there's a great deal more that's going on then just "global warming.". For example, increased dessertification in sub-Saharan Africa, Ozone depletion over Antartica, decreased rainfall in tropical forest due to deforestation, etc, etc. Increases in global temperatures is just one particular sign of anthropogenic climate change.

As I sat around the house yesterday after replying to SF, and yes, when I sit around the house I really sit AROUND the house, (thought I'd get the ridiculous fat joke out of the way to save ID and disloyal some time and energy) I realized how much I'd left out of my response.

I agree absolutely. "Global Warming" is but one ASPECT of "climate change".