Climate Change, No Problem. Global Warming, Uh Oh!
New research released on Tuesday found Americans care more deeply when the term “global warming” is used to describe the major environmental challenge. “Climate change”, in contrast, leaves them relatively cold.
The two terms are often used interchangeably but they generate very different responses, the researchers from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communications and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communications said. . .
The term “global warming” resonates far more powerfully, triggering images of ice melt, extreme weather and catastrophe. Mention “climate change”, however, and many Americans begin to disengage, the researchers found.
Global warming it is then.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Stuart Shapiro
Stuart is a professor and the Director of the Public Policy
program at the Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers
University. He teaches economics and cost-benefit analysis and studies
regulation in the United States at both the federal and state levels.
Prior to coming to Rutgers, Stuart worked for five years at the Office
of Management and Budget in Washington under Presidents Clinton and
George W. Bush.
6 responses to Climate Change, No Problem. Global Warming, Uh Oh!
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
EstebanCafe May 29th, 2014 at 15:57
In an op-ed published yesterday, Cline, the author of a book on the collapse of some of the ancient civilizations of the Near East in the second millennium before the common era, opens his argument by lampooning Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe for his doubts about the warming thesis. Inhofe claims the current climate change arguments are the result of a “hoax,” especially one recent report that warned of the shifts in temperatures causing global conflicts.
But Cline claims what Inhofe needs is not so much a science lesson as a history tutorial and then proceeds to give us all a lecture about how a century-long drought brought on by a warming phase in the earth’s history caused a series of famines, wars, and empire collapses in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean around 1,200 BCE. It’s a fascinating piece of history and Cline tells it well, but the problem here is not the professor’s correct assumptions about ancient climate change. The error lies in his belief that the historical record about climate change that could not possibly be caused by human behavior should lead critics of environmental alarmism to abandon their skepticism.
Rather than bolstering the Al Gore school of hysteria, the more we learn about past
climate change, the shakier the assumptions that are the foundation of global
warming theories seem. (J.S. Tobin)
EstebanCafe May 29th, 2014 at 15:57
In an op-ed published yesterday, Cline, the author of a book on the collapse of some of the ancient civilizations of the Near East in the second millennium before the common era, opens his argument by lampooning Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe for his doubts about the warming thesis. Inhofe claims the current climate change arguments are the result of a “hoax,” especially one recent report that warned of the shifts in temperatures causing global conflicts.
But Cline claims what Inhofe needs is not so much a science lesson as a history tutorial and then proceeds to give us all a lecture about how a century-long drought brought on by a warming phase in the earth’s history caused a series of famines, wars, and empire collapses in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean around 1,200 BCE. It’s a fascinating piece of history and Cline tells it well, but the problem here is not the professor’s correct assumptions about ancient climate change. The error lies in his belief that the historical record about climate change that could not possibly be caused by human behavior should lead critics of environmental alarmism to abandon their skepticism.
Rather than bolstering the Al Gore school of hysteria, the more we learn about past
climate change, the shakier the assumptions that are the foundation of global
warming theories seem. (J.S. Tobin)
Trutherator June 1st, 2014 at 21:33
The reason the ruling control freak cliques left off using “global warming” was because the crowd started laughing at them when climatologists publicly noticed that the earth had been mildly cooling since 1997.
Trutherator June 1st, 2014 at 21:33
The reason the ruling control freak cliques left off using “global warming” was because the crowd started laughing at them when climatologists publicly noticed that the earth had been mildly cooling since 1997.
Bob Waas June 6th, 2014 at 00:33
Global warming, global change aka, the selling of BS to the gullible. Or, how to lie your way to a 100 million dollar fortune.
Bob Waas June 6th, 2014 at 00:33
Global warming, global change aka, the selling of BS to the gullible. Or, how to lie your way to a 100 million dollar fortune.