When you see them changing the terms you know that something else is changing. This all began last year when you started hearing more about “climate change” as less about “global warming.” Why the change in terminology? Because if the skeptics are right, and the warming isn’t happening or can’t be associated with humans then the reason for all the new programs that government wants to use to take over your lives goes away.
If they name it climate change they can continue to justify their meddling, even if we’re on the verge of another ice age.
So, from the same people that brought you “pro-choice” instead of pro-abortion:
The problem with global warming, some environmentalists believe, is “global warming.”
The term turns people off, fostering images of shaggy-haired liberals, economic sacrifice and complex scientific disputes, according to extensive polling and focus group sessions conducted by ecoAmerica, a nonprofit environmental marketing and messaging firm in Washington.
Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about “our deteriorating atmosphere.” Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.” Don’t confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like “cap and cash back” or “pollution reduction refund.” [New York Times]
This just undermines the cause of science even more, to know that it’s so malleable and politicized to the point that it can be radicalized by fundamentalist scientists to the point that they can’t possibly be wrong.
Now, true scientists would reject a hypothesis, and even seek out to find if their hypothesis was actually false—not shout down those that disagree. That and the fact that global warming proponents are looking to profit off of it—well, that should have everyone’s common sense saying these people are full of it.