WUWT recently covered the lexicon shift at the White House: Lexicon Shift Alert: global warming gets another name change.
This seems generally harmless, but wait until you see the source of one of the names on that list: “Climate Disruption”.
We find out who thinks up new memes and names, it’s the University of Oregon. No, really, they sponsor this strange document that reads like a B movie script. And, they have reasons for thinking up such names.
They even have a “trick” for talking to the “UnGreen” people. Apparently, even though I have solar power on my home, own an electric car, and have other green tendencies, because I tend to look at natural variation explanations as a portion of the global warming puzzle, and because I do it (solar power) mostly for avoiding high energy prices, I’m apparently one of the “UnGreen”.
Here is the report:
![CCBC%20Guide[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/ccbc20guide1.jpg?quality=83)
(h/t to reader Steve in Oregon)
Like with “Mike’s Nature Trick”, they have a language “trick” on page 37:
Translation: make people tense and fearful by tapping into their base fears.
Like most liberal enterprises, they have a strong need to label and bin everyone so they can be managed. Here’s their table of labels for people on the same page. I found last one “UnGreens” to be laughable, almost like its a joke to them, like calling people the “undead” aka zombies.
Here is how they say you should talk to “UnGreens”:
So after all the labeling, binning, and handwringing over people that don’t think as they do, they come up with the lexicon to combat the problem. From page 11:
All of this is done with government grants, your tax dollars at work.
In our recent poll, “Irritable Climate Syndrome” took the top spot.
Given the “UnGreen” labeling and the feeling of this being nothing more than a bad horror movie script, I propose this for the next cover page of their work:
In case you don’t recognize the image, see this.
CO2, it’s what’s for dinner.
I’m an ungreen, bitter, clinging denier?
No I’m an un-red free American.
An american who’s been taught and understands the “Scientific Method”
I’m a free American who smells a rat and has for some time
Never trust the government. or anybody beholden to the Government.
NEVER!
I don’t fit any of their “Segment” categories, and suspect that most or all WUWT skeptics don’t either.
Those categories reflect the poverty of the UoO Climate Communicators’ own outlook. They’ve created a fantasy world of allies, enemies, and the mass of the ignorant. Allies to hold, enemies to hate (and neutralize), and the ignorant to frighten into dues-payers.
And all of that, really, is done to merely give meaning to their lives. All the great horrors of human history devolve to that same banal impulse: false meaning through self-delusion. The more frantic the delusion, the more urgent the impulse, the greater the meaning. It’s a recipe for successful reality avoidance (until reality asserts itself). How can that be the life-strategy of a well-constructed human mind? Diversion from reality must be a basal need for an inadequate personality. The amazing thing is that there are so many of them.
They use lots of tricks. A big one is to conflate “environmental degradation and pollution” with climate. They are trying to paint Skeptics as people who don’t care about the environment, but it is just another lie they like to tell. They desperately need people to see “carbon”, the basis for life on our planet as a pollutant, but that is the biggest, most destructive lie in our history.
I’m an ungreen, bitter, clinging deny-er?
No I’m an un-red free American.
An american who’s been taught and understands the “Scientific Method”
I’m a free American who smells a rat and has for some time
Never trust the government. or anybody beholden to the Government.
NEVER!
When Warmists launched the Great Global Warming crusade they knew that playing it straight would be difficult due to great uncertainties in the science. So they had to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period and start a propaganda campaign.
This is their problem. Why couldn’t they simply present and the research and explain the evidence? Why be concerned about media coverage? Who asked scientists to campaign, exaggerate, manipulate and even lie?
The end result is Dr. Peter Gleick. The end result is Climategate. The end result is ‘Baby survives parents’ global warming suicide pact’ – Telegraph, and so on. Climate scientists and their enablers have done a huge amount of damage to science and people.
In the general scheme of things the site is thoroughly irrelevant. Nobody is bothering to comment on their blog http://www.climateaccess.org/blog ( but then who would want to?).
* August 13, 2013 “Talking Climate Change ” zero comments
* June 13, 2013 1 comment
* May 30, 2013 zero comments
* May 10, 2013 THREE whole comments! (the highest number I found though I skipped some pages…)
* December 18, 2012, 2 comments
* October 19, 2011 (first blog entry), 2 comments
Perhaps these bloggers are thrilled enough just to see stuff they wrote appear on a web page?
The “social capital project” appears to be the fantasy of Cara Pike who has a masters of science degree (science?) in, (get this): “Environmental Communications” from California State University, (your tax dollars at work!). Is that anything like freshman grammar for engineers?
Apparently they don’t bother teaching pesky communication basics at the masters degree level, ones like – communication requires an … audience! Good luck Cara! .. you’re gonna need it.
Unbelievable codswallop. They even managed to get their falsified 97% BS in there. How convenient for them that we so called ungreens total 3%…
Anthony, you could dye your skin green and these morons would still not think you “green” enough.
As for me, I’ve had quite enough. I’m going to my shack in the mountains to burn wood and eat deer, black bear and brook trout until I die. Screw them all.
This from the current DOD training manual:
In a section drawing inspiration from a 1992 book titled “Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in America,” the manual also lists “Doomsday thinking” under “traits or behaviors that tend to represent the extremist style.”
Extremists often predict dire or catastrophic consequences from a situation or from a failure to follow a specific course, and they tend to exhibit a kind of crisis-mindedness. It can be a Communist takeover, a Nazi revival, nuclear war, earthquakes, floods, or the wrath of God. Whatever it is, it is just around the corner unless we follow their program and listen to their special insight and wisdom, to which only the truly enlightened have access. For extremists, any setback or defeat is the beginning of the end.
Yes, they are Holier than thou.
Different lipstick. Same old pig.
This style of “trick” talking, for lack of a word that I can think of to describe it. is now being taught in public schools at early grades.
Check out the Common Core curriculum. You might even be shocked at what you find kids are being taught to “nudge” others to their way of thinking!
It’s exactly as U of O describes it.
Wait now, I think the word I was looking for is “propaganda”.
I think it might be a good thing if the percentage of “UnGreens” was higher.
Envy and/or greed are a couple of the main strings pulled by our would-be puppeteers.
Oh wait. That’s not what they mean by “green” is it?
They missed the most important group, people educated and motivated enough to actually look at the science to see whether it’s working.
It is fairly apparent that when they speak of a “proper understanding” it has nothing to do with building a better understanding of what insights can be gleaned from the cumulative empirical observations of human scientific endeavors, but the propriety they seek is complete and unchallenged agreement with their “understanding” of the issue. It is equally apparent that the evidentiary reality doesn’t ever actually enter into their manipulative scaremongering.
The sad truth is that this type of targeted manipulation is successful more often than we would like to believe and to my mind this work casts an interesting light on recent revelations about the numerous efforts of the government to amass ever larger files of seemingly trivial interactions and transactions for all of us. With Google, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, et al exponentially honing their skills at extracting personal preferences and triggers from our computer bread crumb trails, with the government likely pursuing similar plans, with Obamacare requiring the the centralizing of all the personal information that the government, in all of its agencies, insurance companies, the entire medical system, and numerous other sources, has on each of us in a single file at the IRS, the opportunity for chicanery starts to look fairly ominous. I know most here will probably argue that they are immune to this kind of manipulation, but if any of you have ever been married I think you will have to admit that once someone knows about you beyond a certain point, the ability to push your personal buttons is easily available. The danger of a not so benevolent government coming to know about you as well as a spouse, or even more tellingly, an ex-spouse, raises a spector far more threatening than “Big Brother”
This is just more of the old 10:10 sanctimony but without the exploding people.
Pat Frank says:
August 24, 2013 at 1:08 pm
=====
Dude. 1000 uptwinkles.
Truly horrifying! Brainwashing for Dummies. Always, with the Leftists, a fact-free emotional appeal and manipulation.
Having seen the picture at the very top of the piece I am worried that these people are giving cyclists a bad name!
Wonderful the people and politics on the receiving end of billions upon billions of tax dollars need to use tricks to keep the funding rolling, instead of accomplishments.. This is why I detest the greens..
Liberal doesn’t mean alarmist, I’m actually a pure socialist-anarchist and am arguably more disgusted than most by supposedly left-wing groups and individuals pushing what amounts to a global pyramid scheme.
Monetizing CO2 is a way to profit from letting people breathe, that is as pure a capitalist motive as it gets, isn’t it?
Reading through it all was starting to make blood boil until I saw AW’s excellent alternative title page. It made me laugh out loud. I’m going to print it off and stick it on my garage wall whilst I work on my bicycle (I’m a sceptic who doesn’t own a car. I suppose that makes me ‘un-green’)
Having just mentioned my cycling, one thing occurred to me:
Every week I manically pedal my fixie bicycle around the crazy streets of London, and there isn’t a single journey where I haven’t had a near-death experience with a car, bus, taxi, pedestrian, dog, etc.
It can be a dangerous thing cycling, but that’s my personal choice. However, the little child strapped rather unsafely to that woman’s bicycle on the front cover of the document doesn’t have a choice. Obviously the woman is prepared to unnecessarily risk her child’s life whilst she pursues her eco nirvana. Disgusting.
davidmhoffer says:
August 24, 2013 at 12:26 pm
> I’d also want to know how they arrived at categories that add up to 101%.
Just round-off error. If there were three even sized groups, each would round to 33%, for a total of 99%.
That description of un-green doesn’t sound too bad. I guess I’ll join them. Just as long as they don’t talk to me.