Scientific America Goes Full Climate Cult, Will Refer To It As “Climate Emergency” From Now On

Watts Up With That? ran a piece back in 2018 with some of the name changes, using this graphic

It’s all about continuing to ramp up the scare-factor. The Cult of Climastrology had been seriously pimping climate crisis, maybe they should go with climate apocalypse?

Citing grave threat, Scientific American replaces ‘climate change’ with ‘climate emergency’

Scientific American magazine announced Monday that it would stop using the term “climate change” in articles about man-made global warming and substitute “climate emergency” instead.

“Journalism should reflect what science says: the climate emergency is here,” Scientific American senior editor Mark Fischetti said in a Monday post about the magazine’s decision.

To make his point, Fischetti pointed to the mounting number of weather-related disasters that most scientists agree stem from climate change.

“A hurricane blasts Florida. A California dam bursts because floods have piled water high up behind it. A sudden, record-setting cold snap cuts power to the entire state of Texas,” Fischetti wrote. “These are also emergencies that require immediate action. Multiply these situations worldwide, and you have the biggest environmental emergency to beset the earth in millennia: climate change.”

Because hurricanes never happened before fossil fueled vehicles, right? A California dam bursts because sometimes it’s wet in the west, and sometimes dry, and the dam was substandard….hey, perhaps China Joe could allocate money in that Everything Is Infrastructure bill for actual infrastructure?…, and they’re actually blaming a serious cold snap on heat trapping greenhouse gases.

The oldest continuously published magazine in the U.S., Scientific American is not alone it its decision to highlight what it sees as an emergency requiring immediate action. It joined the Columbia Journalism Review, the Nation, the Guardian, Noticias Telemundo, Al Jazeera, Japan’s Asahi Shimbun and Italy’s La Repubblica in releasing a statement about the change in language.

“The planet is heating up way too fast. It’s time for journalism to recognize that the climate emergency is here,” the statement said, adding, “Why ’emergency’? Because words matter. To preserve a livable planet, humanity must take action immediately.”

Interestingly, none of them mentioned any measures they plan to take in their own business operations. No mention of refusing to use fossil fuels to gather the information to create their articles. No mention of doing away with the use of paper for those who still publish a dead tree edition. No mention of turning the heat down to 60 and the AC up to 80 (or doing away with the use of AC altogether). No mention of switching over to 100% renewables to power their operations.

“Failure to slash the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will make the extraordinary heat, storms, wildfires and ice melt of 2020 routine and could ‘render a significant portion of the Earth uninhabitable,'” the statement said, quoting from an article in, where else, Scientific American.

mule fritter sherman potter

 

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

11 Responses to “Scientific America Goes Full Climate Cult, Will Refer To It As “Climate Emergency” From Now On”

  1. CC says:

    Same deal with Pop. Mechanics.
    Had a sub for most of my adult life, then they started going leftist on me.
    Cancel culture goes both ways, assholes.

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    Between 1951 and 1992, the U.S government conducted a total of 1,021 nuclear tests in Nevada. If that didn’t f*ck up the atmosphere and shit, driving cars isn’t gonna do it either. Global warming my f*ckin’ ass. Enough with that bullshit, too…

    Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • Kye says:

      He’s right. If WWII between 1938 and 1945 where all of Europe and almost all of Asia was blown the hell up while the West was building shit at an astounding rate including munitions and A-bombs why wasn’t there any noticeable climate effect?

      I know why. Because people were too busy trying to stay alive to dedicate valuable time and money to a stupid climate scheme.

  3. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    There was a noticeable climate effect during WW2. Warming was accelerated and was the highest until about 1980s.

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Perhaps you don’t know when WWII was going on. See the peak around 1940-1945.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Another chuckalicious comment from the cockwomble.

      You’re killing us out here, Rimjob. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

      Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

  5. Formerlib says:

    Neither scientific or American.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10147 access attempts in the last 7 days.