WH Science Czar: We Need To Rebrand Global Warming

First we had “global warming,” a proposition that Mankind’s release of greenhouse gases, mostly CO2, was causing the Earth to warm. Then we were treated to “climate change”, which attempted to explain away flatlining and declining temps (plus abnormal cold spells, snow, lack of weather events, hot, cold, wet, dry) and turned the movement from a religion to a cult. Now we are treated to

John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, says that the term “global warming” is “a dangerous misnomer” that should be replaced with “global climate disruption.”

It just rolls off the tongue, doesn’t it?

At the Environmental Protection Agency’s 40th celebration of the Clean Air Act on Tuesday, Holdren said, “I think one of the failures of the scientific community was in embracing the term ‘global warming’. Global warming is in fact a dangerous misnomer.” And in a speech last week in Norway, echoing remarks he made at a 2007 speech at Harvard University, Holdren said the term “global climate disruption” should be used instead of “global warming.”

At the 2010 Kavli Prize Science Forum in Oslo, Norway on Sept. 6, Holdren gave a presentation entitled “Climate Change Science and Policy: What Do We Know? What Should We Do?” The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy has posted a PDF-version of Holdren’s presentation of that speech on the White House Website.  One panel in the presentation says: “‘Global warming’ is a (dangerous) misnomer. That term implies something …uniform across the planet, mainly about temperature, gradual, quite possibly benign. What’s actually happening is… highly nonuniform, not just about temperature, rapid compared to capacities for adjustment, harmful for most places and times. We should call it ‘global climate disruption.’”

In other words, we should use this term to blame everything that happens on the Earth, and has been happening for billions of years, on Mankind’s actions. Say, John, how did you get to Oslo? How’d you get around when you were there?

Anyhow, the cult continues to make its case for global climate disruption in Peru (via Tom Nelson)

Peru is going through its coldest winter in 50 years and hundreds of people and thousands of animals have already died of hypothermia as temperatures have fallen to record -23C lows in the mountain villages. But while this year’s cold has been put down to a periodic La Niña phenomenom, scientists here are convinced the bigger picture in the Andes is of progressive climate change.

Retreating glaciers, wild fluctuations of temperatures, unseasonal weather patterns, unpredictable frosts and extreme weather events are all consistent with climate change models.

When everything supposedly supports your scientific hypothesis, it’s no longer science: it’s a cult.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU. Re-Change 2010!

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “WH Science Czar: We Need To Rebrand Global Warming”

  1. Hank says:

    Just call it “weather” and be done with it.

  2. Trish says:

    Great name- weather you say? I almost forgot that word in all the hoopla surrounding climate change/global warming anthropological and otherwise…

  3. mojo says:

    I like “Icky Icky Climate Thingy”, myself.

    Since we’re focusing on the nomenclature rather than the effect, I mean.

    Morons.

  4. john says:

    The war against science continues, to lose just as it has for centuries. I mean “common sense” tells us that if you can’t see greenhouse gases how could they be causing the climate to change ?

  5. Otter says:

    Yes, johnnie. How can .004% of the atmosphere harm us? Especially when it has been 20 times higher in the past, and the world was a ball of ice.

  6. […] sorry, it’s now global climate disruption. My Bad! Did Global Warming Cause NYC Tornado? Flooded subways? A tornado in Brooklyn? It was […]

  7. Ryan M. says:

    Doesn’t there actually need to BE a significant warming trend before you can argue what caused it?

Bad Behavior has blocked 5955 access attempts in the last 7 days.