You’d think with something so devastating, so frightening, so certain, they would not need to keep changing the name to make it more marketable. Maybe they can take a cue from Coca-Cola and call it: “New post normal science AGW” and “Classic AGW”. Yeah, that’ll work. – Anthony
From the Australian:
THE term “climate change” could be replaced by “climate challenges” if a federal commissioned marketing study is taken onboard.
The study of attitudes to climate change among farmers, commissioned by the Agriculture Department, found only 27 per cent of those surveyed believed human activity was causing climate change, compared with 58 per cent of urban dwellers.
As well, primary producers are “very resistant to carbon trading”. “It fills them with dread, and there were strong negative reactions towards it,” the report says.
Handed to the department late last year, the report warns that terminology that fails to take into account the attitude of primary producers towards human-induced climate change risks failure. The term “climate change” sets up negative reactions among primary producers for a number of reasons, from scepticism through to perceptions that they are being held solely responsible for causing climate change, it says.
“Preferred terms such as ‘climate challenges’, ‘prolonged drought’ and ‘risk management’ are accepted, better understood and more likely to motivate change.”
Read the entire article here
h/t to David Archibald
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Jeremy wrote:
For a “settled science” I’ve never seen a name change so often.
Physics would never claim itself to be settled and yet I honestly don’t know the last time it changed names.
Before the 20th century physics was sometimes known as “natural philosophy.” I wonder what people who don’t know that would say if they were asked to guess what subjects “natural philosophy” covered? It would not surprise me if they said the environment and climate change!
Oh, and regarding that ‘Horizon’ with Ben Miller; after talking for some time about accuracy in temperature measurement, guess where he sited his brand new home weather monitoring station – yes, up on a flat asphalt roof where it can bask in all that re-radiated infra red!
Brilliant! Spend taxpayer money to research how to sell a bad agenda to the victims of the bad (scam) agenda.
Governments are supposed to be on the side of the people, not trying to hoodwink them into shooting themselves in the foot and crippling their economy and futures.
Call it what it is:
The Global Warming Get-Rich-Quick at Everybody’s Expense, Wealth Redistribution, One-World Government, Power Grab Scam. If it does not sell, so be it.
”
Pull My Finger says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:32 am
Climalingus.
It requires a lot of lip service and manipulation to get a positive outcome.
”
Quote of the week?
Climate has always changed and always will. Plan to move or insulate a lot when another ice age hits and in the mean time enjoy our inter-glacial garden planet.
There. That’s my plan. Where do I get funding to study the options in depth more? I think I would start by seeing how people adapt to warmer climates. Let me see .. I’ll need a couple of years (maybe a decade or two) of study in Hawaii.
Cheers
Jimbo says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:52 am
Australian farmers……………… have just suffered from Biblical floods and now Gore blames the floods on global warming having earlier blamed the drought on global warming. What a snake oil salesman.
======================================================
The current massive flooding in Queensland is truly appalling by any measure. But then so is Al Gore’s comment reported that it’s all due the “Global Warming” even more so. The media cries “unprecedented” and worse than the 1974 flood. Well yes. But here are some additional reports just come in:
Lower part of Brisbane submerged. And water still on the rise; the “Elamang” and “Paluma” riverboats were carried by the flood into the Botanical Gardens.
Numbers of houses at Ipswich and Brisbane have been washed down the river. Seven miners drowned due to flooding of the Eclipse Colliery at North Ipswich. The Indooroopily railway bridge was washed away by the flood. The lower part of South Brisbane is completely submerged. The flood has risen 7.3 metres above the mean spring tides. North end of Victoria bridge has been destroyed. Business is at a standstill in Brisbane and there have been several deaths by drowning.
Yes appalling, but can it be due to recent global warming? Well no it happened in 1893 with Brisbane river rising nearly 4 metres above the level in 1974. It’s Australia’s wild climate in the past and so it will be in the future.
Pull My Finger says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:32 am
Excellently droll!
Jimbo wrote:
Now that will bring the Australian farmers on side alright. They have just suffered from Biblical floods and now Gore blames the floods on global warming having earlier blamed the drought on global warming.
Abraham Maslow wrote in his book, The Psychology of Science. p. 15. “It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.”
Global warming is Al Gore’s hammer.
Is the climate a challenge? That is what they say.
Hot from the presses, the term for today.
A marketing study,
the reason still muddy,
coined it. The weather will probably blow it away.
Roy UK says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:39 am
You can’t polish a turd…
Actually a time honoured term in my profession is the turd polisher, the associate that takes the work of a partner and makes it good and worthwhile. This goes along with fart catcher (the associate that never allows anything to splash the partner) and the shaker (the associate that does everything for the partner, so the partner’s hands don’t touch nasty things)
Steeptown says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:23 am
You can rename faeces as poo, but it’s still shit.
Indeed. Of the bull variety, if my sense of smell is not mistaken.
There has always been a certain ‘genius’ in the marketing of AGW. They tied their cause to not just weather, but bad weather. There is always bad weather, and it always makes the news. And it evokes an emotional response instead of a logical one. At the risk of a bad pun, it’s a perfect storm.
If Schrodinger were alive today he’d lock climate change in a box give it the quantum treatment and declare it neither dead nor alive .
Oh dear trouble coming in Oz and its the Green fanatics causing it !
James Delingpole: Queensland floods: but at least the ‘endangered’ Mary River cod is safe, eh?
Tuesday, January 11th 2011, This is a guest post from one of our regular commenters, Memory Vault. He’s understandably upset about the Australian floods, which may have claimed more than 70 lives. But what really upsets him is that this disaster could have been prevented. He blames green campaigners so wedded to their ideology they never stop to consider the human consequences. It is to them his bitter letter is addressed.
Andrew Bolt has similarly harsh words for Australia’s eco nuts. Were it not for the actions of Environment Minister Peter Garrett, for example, the Queensland town of Gympie would not now be underwater. Unfortunately, Garrett took it upon himself to block the proposed dam that would have prevented it.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100071290/queensland-floods-but-at-least-the-endangered-mary-river-cod-is-safe-eh/
How come all euphemisms end up converging on “challenged”?
Orwell’s version of Newspeak had a small vocabulary, but we’re heading for a ONE-challenge challenge, and we’re challenging the challenge very challengingly.
So, in addition to the complexities of climate, and the many aspects of physics, chemistry, astronomy, geology etc that involve climate, we now have to suffer semantics.
Robinson says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:06 am
“Over at Bishop Hill, all were agreed that Irritable Climate Syndrome was probably the best of the bunch :p.”
I still think that ‘Climate Bollocks’ was the best suggestion.
*R Gates is right, people displaced by Climate……….. will have to find someplace elsewhere to live. People here in the UK have been moving to Spain to escape the appalling climate for some years now.
*Hasn’t he been sin binned?
Climate chaos is another one to add to the big board.
Surely a scam remains a scam whatever the name you give it.
“Federal commissioned marketing study”? They’re selling soap?
I’ll help them. If no one wants your soap? Don’t worry about the name. Worry about the soap.
R. Gates says:
January 11, 2011 at 11:11 am
‘let’s get the full spin on this and call it climate “opportunities”. Those diplaced by the climate disruption will have the “opportunity” to find new places to live.’
Surely, Mr. Gates, you mean ‘opportunities’ to tax and control on the basis of unfalsifiable assertions, do you not? After all, this is marketing not science. isn’t it?
R. Gates says:
January 11, 2011 at 11:11 am
“Heck, why just call it climate “challenges”…let’s get the full spin on this and call it climate “opportunities”. Those displaced by the climate disruption will have the “opportunity” to find new places to live.”
____________________________________________________
Would those be the people forced to sell their houses at greatly reduced value and move away from wind farms for health reasons? Or Australian farmers forced off their land due to government climate policy restricting effective land management techniques?
I feel that “Climate Challenges” may an appropriate re-branding. Those involved in the AGW hoax will certainly be facing some serious challenges throughout the next two decades. So many scientists, politicians, environmentalists, journolists (sic), and UN kleptocrats will be facing the challenges of getting the population of planet earth to forget their involvement in the scam. Failing to meet these challenges will have a major impact. There may be no “Biocrisis”, no “Energy crisis” and no UN global governance. To the guilty facing these challenges in the age of the Internet, all I can say is – good luck with that.
Pull My Finger says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:32 am
… and tongue-wagging?
Good one!
So only 27% of people who actually live in the climate, and it actually affects their livelihood (unlike all us urban dwellers who rely on them to feed us) believe the climate is changing because of us.
That leaves 73% who do not…..