Results of the study show that the term “Climate Change” is too bland to excite people
Story submitted by Eric Worrall
Bryan Walsh, writing for Time Magazine, has published a claim by the Yale Project on Climate Communication, that the term “global warming” is more effective at engaging people’s attention than “climate change”. People apparently associate “Global Warming” with terrifying climate catastrophes, such as melting ice and coastal flooding. See the story here:
http://time.com/119517/global-warming-climate-change/
“Climate Change”, on the other hand, tends to be associated with unusual, but not necessarily terrifying weather events.
Bryan concludes with the suggestion that environmentalists should consider their use of language when attempting to motivate their audience.
Who knows – perhaps this study heralds the exciting return of the term Climate Change – at least until the next El Niño fizzles.
For example, according to the Yale study, the term “global warming” is associated with:
- Greater certainty that the phenomenon is happening, especially among men, Generation X (31-48), and liberals;
- Greater understanding that human activities are the primary cause among Independents;
- Greater understanding that there is a scientific consensus about the reality of the phenomenon among Independents and liberals;
- More intense worry about the issue, especially among men, Generation Y (18-30), Generation X, Democrats, liberals and moderates;
- A greater sense of personal threat, especially among women, the Greatest Generation (68+), African-Americans, Hispanics, Democrats, Independents, Republicans, liberals and moderates;
- Higher issue priority ratings for action by the president and Congress, especially among women, Democrats, liberals and moderates;
- Greater willingness to join a campaign to convince elected officials to take action, especially among men, Generation X, liberals and moderates.
– See more at: http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/global-warming-vs-climate-change/#sthash.qv2Aqdrq.dpuf
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Steve P, I meant to say “in every cohort there are degrees and exceptions” in my last. If you are one of them, well and good.
Who funds this Yale project?
Is it like the Columbia University ‘telephone calls from the future” scam funded by tax payers?
T-Bird says:
May 29, 2014 at 3:47 am
Ah, so Korea, the rise of TV, the Cold War, Beatniks, assassination of JFK, ‘Nam, and the media promotion of the Hippies were all executed by Baby Boomers? And I suppose you think it was Baby Boomers who demonized Joe McCarthy, allowing the many Reds in the U.S. establishment to walk, and continue their work?
I suggest sir, you’re barking up the wrong tree.
Your generation was completely under the influence of the Boob Tube from day one, in contradistinction to my generation, the true Baby Boomers. We didn’t get a TV in my house until the televised Army-McCarthy hearings in 1954, which I watched with my grandfather, a WWI vet.
The true post-war baby boom was over by about 1955. You squeak into the expanded definition of the Baby Boom, and yet think you know my generation? The true Baby Boomers were born of fathers who’d served in WWII, as my father did, and who got to making babies upon their safe return.
But go ahead and blame the victims, that’s usually a successful ploy.
What they are actually saying is that the term Global Warming has more propaganda value than the term Climate Change. This may or may not be true. Note that the folks at Yale are not impressed by the fact that there has been no warming for over seventeen years. One of the problems with the term Global Warming is that those climes that experience nasty winters would welcome some warming. It was my impression that the use of the term Climate Change was to avoid this attractive aspect of warming.
But this sort of discussion is symtomatic of the fact that the alarmists have reached the end of their tether and their prospects of taking over the world have declined. In other words, the tide now flows against them.
But nonetheless, SKEPTICS SHOULD ORGANIZE
These people seem terribly confused. Is their project a scientific one, or an exercise in effective public relations? For the AGW cause, way back last decade, was based upon the argument that the world was heating up and humans were the cause. And if memory served me correctly, the Alarmists quite suddenly re-branded their efforts from AGW to Climate Change. Now, that most scientists admit that there hasn’t been any statistically measured warming going on 2 decades, some in the Alarmist camps which to switch back to Climate Change?
Does everything boil down to PR with these people?
JP says:
May 29, 2014 at 8:35 am
Please, everyone: Don’t play into the alarmists’ hands, and let them move the goalposts, or redefine their argument ex post facto
.
The original argument (and meme) was Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming – CAGW.
T-bird says in part, “the baby boomers – that most spoiled rotten crop of brats ever to walk the face of this earth, had to come from somewhere, now, didn’t they?”
This is as serious subject (though we may be tempted to use flippant terms) — it may have been that the Greatest Generation were terrible parents. My own grandmother, who was asked to speak and write quite often, did say that she thought that perhaps some of the institutions they were passing on were a bit cold, and that she understood the desire to experiment and question which she saw in her children. But she obviously felt that they would come back to value what was good and true in the end.
On the other hand, the other possibility is that the Boomers in most cases simply broke their parents hearts and flagrantly took a path of drug use, free love, rock and roll, perpetual student-hood, and collectivism.
The betrayal is truly staggering to me, when I consider that the Boomers, in many many cases, are now favoring more power and control by countries like Russia, China, and even Germany – countries and ideologies which the Greatest Generation fought hard to keep Europe and the world safe from. Now Boomers are trying to hand over power to the EU and UN as fast as they can. It is a truly devastating and very personal act of treachery in my opinion. I am sorry to say but even the more sensible Boomers still often carry on their attack and war to break down and destroy the middle class, because it is the middle class that is concerned about drugs, drug use, and other issues of self-control and moderation. Frugality, duty, ownership, marriage, and liberty are all foundational to the middle class.
And Boomers are still lying about their parents, saying that they were all bored and unhappy in their marriages with their white picket fences. That was unfair and I cringe when they do that. And now?! — they are keen to put everyone on sustainable plantations, implementing a system of micromanagement through environmental controls! So this absolutely proves that their “ideals” were never ever about individual liberty, but only about indulging themselves, and removing constraints from themselves. They now wish to take prosperity and freedom away from others “to save the planet.” I guarantee you, even playing Olympian Gods, they still won’t “get no satisfaction.” Even they know what they are like. They all have dreams of clouds in their coffee.
Any data to support your assertion that my generation is responsible?
Zeke, are my words so difficult to comprehend? Everything you attribute to Baby
Boomers was already in progress while we were still children.
You can’t judge a book by looking at its cover:
One for the road.
They made great ear candy and even the Rolling Stones can get it right sometimes…
Sympathy for the Devil lyrics,
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/rollingstones/sympathyforthedevil.html
I think this is “their” song;
“The US economy shifted into reverse in the first three months of 2014 shrinking by an annualised rate of 1%, official estimates have shown.
The fall in output was blamed on an unusually cold and disruptive winter – one of the coldest in the US for 20 years – and a plunge in business investment.”
But the idea that warmth is bad and to be covered by a mile thick layer of ice is somehow good is what is being spread right now.
How about “Climate Confusion”?
If GW is being rolled out, it’s probably in anticipation of the upcoming El Niño.
It’s interesting how everyone talks about the global warming debate, but it shouldn’t even be a debate.
The fact that one of the possibilities is that the world will end and lots of people will die means that we MUST eliminate that option from the table. It’s removing the greater of two evils. Sure, if we’re wrong and it doesn’t happen we’ll lose money but that’s not a big problem compared to the end of the world, is it?