It would probably be more helpful to prove using the Scientific Method, using actual evidence and facts and such, but, hey, this isn’t about science
‘It’s a crisis, not a change’: the six Guardian language changes on climate matters
A short glossary of the changes we’ve made to the Guardian’s style guide, for use by our journalists and editors when writing about the environment
1.) “climate emergency†or “climate crisis†to be used instead of “climate changeâ€
Climate change is no longer considered to accurately reflect the seriousness of the overall situation; use climate emergency or climate crisis instead to describe the broader impact of climate change. However, use climate breakdown or climate change or global heating when describing it specifically in a scientific or geophysical sense eg “Scientists say climate breakdown has led to an increase in the intensity of hurricanesâ€.
If it’s such a crisis, why is the Guardian still using fossil fuels to gather news? Why are they not telling us that their operations, including their Internet server, are powered solely by renewables?
2.) “climate science denier†or “climate denier†to be used instead of “climate scepticâ€
The OED defines a sceptic as “a seeker of the truth; an inquirer who has not yet arrived at definite conclusionsâ€. Most “climate scepticsâ€, in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, deny climate change is happening, or is caused by human activity, so ‘denier’ is more accurate.
I’m still waiting for that overwhelming scientific evidence. The trope of “CO2 has gone up while warming has occurred” is not proof.
3.) Use “global heating†not “global warmingâ€
‘Global heating’ is more scientifically accurate. Greenhouse gases form an atmospheric blanket that stops the sun’s heat escaping back to space.
Yes, they do, but, how much of the warming has been caused by those released by Mankind? That is one of the arguments. Since a goodly chunk of that release from Mankind comes from agriculture, what would the Crisismongers have us do? Starve?
In order to keep below 1.5C of warming, the aspiration of the world’s nations, we need to halve emissions by 2030 and reach zero by mid century. It is also likely we will need to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, perhaps by the large-scale restoration of nature. It is a huge task, but we hope that tracking the daily rise of CO2 will help to maintain focus on it.
Well, good luck with that.
