The morphology of "global warming"

Obama’s science Czar John Holdren has decided the new name for global warming, er, climate change shall be:

Background image from freephoto.com

Because the first two didn’t work apparently.

(CNSNews.com) 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.”

I have a new name for Mr. Holdren, sort of like a superhero name: “Johnny Desperate”.

From CNS news and the American Thinker, barf bag optional.

WH Science Czar ‘Global Warming’ is ‘Dangerous Misnomer’

By James Lewis, American Thinker

John Holdren, our official fraudulent “Science Czar” for our  equally mendacious President, has dumped “global warming” as a “dangerous misnomer.” Ah, yes, that would be it then. It’s not the facts but the words that are wrong, says America’s official Doctor Science.

In scientific terms this means John Holdren has run up the white flag and is begging for mercy. “Warming” is something we can measure scientifically. “Global Warming” is a lot more speculative, but with satellites, weather balloons, and plenty of ocean buoys, we now know that it’s just wrong. Global Warming has been shot down in flames by scientific skeptics who resorted to an unfair tactic called “facts and observations.”

The wild hypothesis of “catastrophic anthropogenic global warming a 100 years from now,” is so obviously harebrained sci fi that no sane person can believe in it.

Dr. Holdren’s newest brainstorm? Forget all that warming stuff. No, we are now supposed to believe in something called “global climate disruption.”

That way some wildly overpaid “internationally respected” climate modeler can predict that in a hundred years things will get two degrees warmer, colder, or neither one or the other, and still predict the end of the earth. That’ll be a couple of hundred million dollars for more life-saving “research,” if you please.

The media are banging on “scientific” doors for another cataclysmic headline, right now, to feed their hunger for the Scare of the Day.  Their whole business model depends on it. The New York Times is talking about giving up their paper edition entirely. ABC has fired its “News” chief. They desperately need another Scary Hobgoblin to goose up the ignorant masses, or they might go belly-up tomorrow. Let’s hope they do go down tomorrow, because it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. That why free markets have losers, and boy, are these people ever losers.

I suppose that’s why Dr. Holdren thinks that old and toxic phrase “Global Warming” is now “dangerous.” But dangerous for whom? Not dangerous for the real world, that’s for sure. Not dangerous for developing countries that build another coal-fired power plant every day to feed their billions of hungry people. They can see people dying on the streets in Calcutta, but they can’t see two degrees warmer in a hundred years being such a big deal. Maybe Dr. Holdren thinks that “Global Warming” is now “dangerous” for the corrupt politicized faux-scientists who have built their careers on ecological hobgoblins? That sounds more like it.

Read the rest at:

WH Science Czar ‘Global Warming’ is ‘Dangerous Misnomer’

h/t to Dave from our moderation team.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

171 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ed
September 16, 2010 2:34 pm

Here’s another term: double-plus-ungood.

Severian
September 16, 2010 2:36 pm

Oceania has always been at war with Global Warming.
Oceania has never been at war with Global Warming, Oceania has always been at war with Climate Change.
Oceania has never been at war with Climate Change, Oceania has always been at war with Global Climate Disruption.
Man, Orwell was an optimist.

DT
September 16, 2010 2:36 pm

Our country is slipping into a Great Depression. We are dependent on foreign energy sources for our lives. Our military is bogged down in two wars that will never end. The Federal government is obviously bankrupt. True unemployment is heading for 20% while the home foreclosure and poverty levels skyrocket. Our industrial capacity has been decimated by foreign competition. We cannot fulfill our Social Security, Medicare, or pension obligations long term.
And the Obama administration is spending time, money, and resources…coming up with new, more effective propaganda for the theory of anthropogenic global warming.
Stick a fork in the Obama administration and in the Democrat controlled Congress. They are done.

Jimash
September 16, 2010 2:42 pm

How about “Wrath of Cthulhu ” ?
That has a nice ring , and doesn’t commit to anything but the worship and veneration of Cthulhu.
Signed,
Cthulhu

September 16, 2010 2:44 pm

p.s.
New paper from L&P gives following prediction :
The magnetic probability distribution function (PDF) is show for the IR measurements of sunspots during Cycle 23. With the assumption discussed in the text, we can produce PDFs for Cycles 24 and 25. A simple scaling using the total number of spots suggests Cycle 24 will peak with a SSN of 66, and Cycle 25 will peak with a SSN of 7.

galileonardo
September 16, 2010 2:46 pm

I propose Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Anomalies, or CACA for short.
This wouldn’t be the same John Holdren who wrote these gems, would it?
“The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”
And this:
“The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?”
And this:
“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”
And this:
“One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption-especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.”
And this:
“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime-sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market. The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”
Those were just thought experiments though, of course. Just harmless brainstorming. Yikes!

Enneagram
September 16, 2010 2:48 pm

Jimash says:
September 16, 2010 at 2:42 pm
If you revise the WUWT I said it long ago. THE OTHER GODS ARE HERE!

Evan Jones
Editor
September 16, 2010 2:50 pm

Adding syllables won’t work. Maybe give “Climate Doom” a spin?

Jordan
September 16, 2010 2:52 pm

Is this an admission that the predicted troposheric hot spot doesn’t exist and the prediction was a failure? I kinda think it us – and that the theory is falsified.
“radiative forcing” was supposed to cause warming. Everything else was a consequence of warming. No warming, no catastrophe.
And to Dr Dave (“me ‘ole mucker”) – SOx keep your feet warm in these cold British winters we seem to be getting again 😉

Jim
September 16, 2010 2:53 pm

Is that Global Climate Disruption or Catastrophic Global Climate Disruption? Or maybe Super Deep Dark Climate Disruption with Shivers Up the Spine and Mild Disorientation?

Wade
September 16, 2010 2:54 pm

Another unfalsifiable term. The difference between this term and the others is this one can always be blamed on humans. Well, since they seem to want to rename their religion, I have a few ideas.
* Unnatural Climate Anomalies
* International Climate Alteration
* Abnormal Climate Variations

Jordan
September 16, 2010 2:55 pm

Correction “tropospheric hot spot” (not easy to post from phone)

Alex Buddery
September 16, 2010 2:59 pm

I am for this new term. When the term global warming is used to describe anthropogenic influences on the climate then it implies that if the globe is warming that humans must be responsible for the majority of that warming. Climate change is even worse because it implies that if the climate is changing then humans are responsible. Global climate disruption is a little better but I would prefer Anthropogenic climate disruption.

Editor
September 16, 2010 3:06 pm

“Overseas contingency operation” …
I think the new face for this propaganda mission should be Janet Napolitano, who is clearly the most competent administration official to continually “deny the obvious”.

Z
September 16, 2010 3:09 pm

latitude says:
September 16, 2010 at 1:55 pm
If it walks like a duck………

…then it probably has been sitting on a horse too long…
Is it just me, or are these recent events starting to taste a little of desperation? Or is there some other theme here that I’m missing?
We’ve had the “chicks dig global warming” report, the “disagree with global warming and you’re a fruitcake” report and finally the “calling global warming ‘global warming’ is dangerous” report.
It is a bit 1984, but also a bit Alice in Wonderland.

Coalsoffire
September 16, 2010 3:10 pm

He probably considered “Climategate” but found it was already taken.

Jimash
September 16, 2010 3:23 pm

Enneagram says:
” a Planetary Regime-sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources,If you revise the WUWT I said it long ago. THE OTHER GODS ARE HERE!

I think I do remember that.
galileonardo says:
John Holdem (sic)says
” a Planetary Regime-sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources,”
Who knew that the Presidents advisor on matters scientific fancied himself a comic book villain ? That sounds a lot like a Lex Luthor plan to me.
Only the demonic chortle os missing.

Bruce
September 16, 2010 3:24 pm

More of this is going on elsewhere. The Guardian has now started to refer to warmists as climate realists.
“Only one of the 48 Republicans seeking a seat in the Senate has dared to stand on the side of climate science or support climate change legislation – and he was knocked out of the running yesterday. The losing climate realist, Mike Castle, served nearly two decades as the state’s lone member of Congress…” (my emphasis)

PaulR
September 16, 2010 3:25 pm

Wow, put me down as a Disrupter! I like that Climate CHAOS.

Jimash
September 16, 2010 3:27 pm

Damn my paste button !
It’s Global Keyboard Disruption

September 16, 2010 3:31 pm

So, the “global climate” is postulated to be unchanging?
And if it does change, then it is our fault because we control it?
Think, then vote, while you still can.
Thanks James!

INGSOC
September 16, 2010 3:32 pm

I had just got started reading this when I was seized by a local colon disruption. Back in a jiffy!
😉

September 16, 2010 3:33 pm

John Holdren is quite correct it is a dangerous misnomer. All misnomers are ultimately dangerous. Danger lurks in all corner and re-branding is one that can be even more dangerous then redefining. Someone needs to send these boys and girls back to school for a refresher course in marketing and advertising. My consulting firm will be glad to organize it for them. Of course I will need a big retainer up front. In Canadian dollars too.

Alan Simpson not from Friends of the Earth
September 16, 2010 3:45 pm

Can’t we change it to Quisling? That has surely worth more points at scrabble 😉

James Sexton
September 16, 2010 3:46 pm

From the rest of the story not posted here, but well worth repeating.
“John Holdren is the guy whose stellar career started with Global Cooling in the 70s, and who has managed to surf the wild waves of ecological hysteria for decades, making a damned good living at it. ”
Just like the rest of the snake oil salesmen. I’m so absolutely sure of it this time, I’m willing to bet your entire socio-economic future on it! Just like last time!
For those pinheads wanting to save the future generations of horrible hardships, deaths, diseases and conflict, LOOK OUT THE WINDOW, YOU TWITS!!! Why don’t you try fixing some of those before you worry about a tomorrow that exists on in the fantasies of Luddites and Malthusians.

Verified by MonsterInsights