There have long been claims that some unspecificed "they" has "changed the name from 'global warming' to 'climate change'". In reality, the two terms mean different things, have both been used for decades, and the only individual to have specifically advocated changing the name in this fashion is a global warming 'skeptic'.
Climate Change Both of the terms in question are used frequently in the scientific literature, because they refer to two different physical phenomena. As the name suggests, 'global warming' refers to the long-term trend of a rising average global temperature, which you can see here:.
For example, changes in precipitation patterns, increased prevalence of droughts, heat waves, and other extreme weather, etc.
These projections of future global precipitation changes from the IPCC report are an example of climate change:. Human greenhouse gas emissions are causing global warming, which in turn is causing climate change. However, because the terms are causally related, they are often used interchangeably in normal daily communications. The argument "they changed the name" suggests that the term 'global warming' was previously the norm, and the widespread use of the term 'climate change' is now.
However, this is simply untrue. Barrett and Gast published a letter in Science in entitled simply 'Climate Change'. The journal 'Climatic Change' was created in and is still published today. There are many, many other examples of the use of the term 'climate change' many decades ago. There is nothing new whatsoever about the usage of the term. In fact, according to Google Books , the usage of both terms in books published in the United States has increased at similar rates over the past 40 years:.
And a Google Scholar search reveals that the term 'climate change' was in use before the term 'global warming', and has always been the more commonly-used term in scientific literature:. Those who perpetuate the "they changed the name" myth generally suggest two reasons for the supposed terminology change. The first premise is demonstrably wrong, as the first figure above shows the planet is still warming, and is still accumulating heat. Quite simply, global warming has not stopped.
The second premise is also wrong, as demonstrated by perhaps the only individual to actually advocate changing the term from 'global warming' to 'climate change', Republican political strategist Frank Luntz in a controversial memo advising conservative politicians on communicating about the environment:.
So to sum up, although the terms are used interchangeably because they are causally related, 'global warming' and 'climate change' refer to different physical phenomena. The term 'climate change' has been used frequently in the scientific literature for many decades, and the usage of both terms has increased over the past 40 years. Moreover, since the planet continues to warm, there is no reason to change the terminology.
Perhaps the only individual to advocate the change was Frank Luntz, a Republican political strategist and global warming skeptic, who used focus group results to determine that the term 'climate change' is less frightening to the general public than 'global warming'. Last updated on 8 January by pattimer.
Maybe typo "'climate change' is now". I just wrote a short and simple blog about this very topic, focusing on what "big data" via Google Books Ngram Viewer can tell us about this question. There are some interesting differences in the results between "American English" and "British English".
I believe that some people also use "climate change" because they feel that "global warming" invites the misconception that warming would occur uniformly and univerversally around the world.
I've also heard "global weirding" and "climate chaos," neither of which is entirely accurate either since even unusual or catastrophic effects have their causes. I suppose any term can be open to misinterpretations, and we've just got to do our best to avoid or correct those. B Please read that page you linked to, then actually read this Skeptical Science post. And — What of this , Conventionalske 9?? In doing so he provides two links without explanation or argument, in contradiction of the fifth requirement specified in the comments policy , ie:.
Any link or picture should be accompanied by text summarizing both the content of the link or picture, and showing how it is relevant to the topic of discussion. Failure to do both of these things will result in the comment being considered off topic. The links themselves are to a graph, and two pictures which are themselves off topic on this thread, and hence in violation of the first point of the comments policy:.
Comments are on topic if they draw attention to possible errors of fact or interpretation in the main article, of if they discuss the immediate implications of the facts discussed in the main article. However, general discussions of Global Warming not explicitly related to the details of the main article are always off topic. Moderation complaints are always off topic and will be deleted".
They will, of course, not have been censored, but will be demonstrating that they are a precious petal who thinks the rules do not apply to them because they are so special. For what it is worth, the first link is to a version of the Remote Sensing Systems TMT temperature series, commencing in January of to ensure we cannot draw a proper trend on the record, and terminating in what looks like March of due to, at best laziness, but more likely a desire to exclude the and records from the chart.
If you do not lie by concealing data, what you actually see is this:. In which the curren EL Nino, likely weaker than that of , has recorded three successive monthly temperatures warmer than the warmest month in , with February of being 0. I have not read everything here so i apologize if my questions duplicate others. So, it seems to me that these changes have been tracked over an incredibly short time, geologically speaking.
How do scientists NOT just scientists who support Global Warming or Global Climate Change position their theories in light of a very short time we have tracked this. In terms of geologic times we have seen evidence of major climate changes not just warming. Also, there is plenty of evidence that many, many scientists, as late is the s, were trying to convince us we were in the beginning of a global cooling that would have devastating effects. Of course, this leaves skeptics today, adamant about their skepticism and rightly so!
Next, you say that the terms, Global Warming and Global Climate Change are "loosely" related after you make the case that this is not a loose relationship at all. Finally, you say that the charge that "they have changed the name This also stokes skepticism on two levels; first, suspicion as to the reluctance to commit to "Global Warming.
Liberals have clearly used this as a political issue to demean those who express skepticism. Your arguments are not conclusive. Plus, why the desire to use a term that does not enlighten and leaves itself open to skepticism? So why use a term that does not enlighten? Might as well make it even more generic and meaningless by calling it simply, "Change.
If you want to discuss that myth further, please do so on that thread, not this one. See the posts " The Human Fingerprint in Global Warming ," being sure to read not just the Basic tabbed pane, but then the Intermediate one and, crucially, the Advanced one.
If you want to comment on that topic, do so on that thread, not this one. A google search for "global warming" limited to news finds articles using the term by USA Today, Voice of America, the New York Times and the New York Post, just on the first page, and all on the first page of the search results.
Your doubly emphasized 'fact' is clearly a fiction. I generally find that when people have to invent 'facts' that just ain't so to strengthen their argument, their argument doesn't hold water.
However, on learning more of the history of it, I found I had been wrong - the term is quite some decades old and has been contemporary over many decades with "Global Warming". Nevertheless, "Change" is a term having its own virtue, in that both hotter and colder events [as you may have seen with the N.
So, "Climate Change" is not evasive or dishonest. The very recent, very rapid global warming of the past century or two is a real, simple fact - and is nothing caused by "politics". It simply exists , and is getting worse - as a consequence of simple physics: The evidence is plain. Physical evidence - entirely free of politics.
In geological terms, the climate has been stable and unchanging for 8, years. The very slight wiggles during that time in planetary surface temperature have been tiny and insignificant - until the major change of the past years or so. Remember please, that the planet was a super-hot molten blob about 5, million years ago - but that is a dishonest statement if I mean it to imply it doesn't matter if you or anyone else dies in a modern wildfire which is "relatively cool" compared with conditions 5, million years ago.
The real reason you have skeptics is due to those emails regardless of how they were dismissed- which I'm sure is part of another topic and I'll be chastised for bringing it up here- scoff- guffaw- also there is the interesting bit about where the temperatures are being read from- as we all know, concrete creates and stores heat so placing a reading site in the city where thirty years ago temp readings were done atop grassy plains will skew the data-https: We don't dare touch those as the united corps of greed would report less profit that quarter.
Appogies for any errs as I typed this on my phone. Thank you for taking the time to share with us. Skeptical Science is a user forum wherein the science of climate change can be discussed from the standpoint of the science itself.
Ideology and politics get checked at the keyboard. Thanks for your understanding and compliance in this matter. Besides sloganeering, you also went for gish-gallop and offtopic. Use the search function or arguments buttons at the top to find appropriate places to comment but read the article first. Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!
Test Your Knowledge - and learn some interesting things along the way. You might've seen this one before. Paraphrasing in a cut-and-paste world. Some of our favourite British words. The story of an imaginary word that managed to sneak past our editors and enter the dictionary. How we chose 'feminism'. How to use a word that literally drives some people nuts. The awkward case of 'his or her'.
Test your knowledge - and maybe learn something along the way. Build a city of skyscrapers—one synonym at a time. Explore the year a word first appeared. Definition of global warming: See global warming defined for English-language learners See global warming defined for kids.
Examples of global warming in a Sentence World leaders will address the problem of global warming. Recent Examples of global warming from the Web That is a welcome feature, though not the main aim, since the contribution of places like Narotoli to global warming is minuscule.
No single record, in isolation, can be attributed to global warming. Heat records have been set all over the world during the past week," 5 July Last year, The New York Times wrote about climate-denier groups that have purchased Google's AdWords to surface sites propagating claims that global warming is a hoax. For years, Carbon Capture and Storage CCS —the process of capturing carbon from sources of pollution and pumping it underground—has been hailed as a promising solution to global warming.
And global warming is likely to stoke even more fire in coming years, by making wildlands more combustible. The new initiative was organized by the Climate Group, a nonprofit that works with government agencies and businesses on climate solutions, and C40 Cities, an international of city governments focused on global warming.
Global warming, also referred to as climate change, is the observed century-scale rise in the average temperature of the Earth's climate system and its related effects. Multiple lines of scientific evidence show that the climate system is warming.
Global warming definition is - an increase in the earth's atmospheric and oceanic temperatures widely predicted to occur due to an increase in the greenhouse effect resulting especially from pollution.
Expected long-term effects of current global warming are rising sea levels, flooding, melting of polar ice caps and glaciers, fluctuations in temperature and precipitation, more frequent and stronger El Niños and La Niñas, drought, heat waves, and forest fires. See more at greenhouse effect. Jun 23, · Global warming: the increase in Earth’s average surface temperature due to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Climate change: a long-term change in the Earth’s climate, or of a region on Earth. Within scientific journals, this .
A: Global warming occurs when carbon dioxide (CO2) and other air pollutants and greenhouse gases collect in the atmosphere and absorb sunlight and solar radiation that have bounced off the earth. As the name suggests, 'global warming' refers to the long-term trend of a rising average global temperature, which you can see here: 'Climate change', again as the name suggests, refers to the changes in the global climate which result from the increasing average global temperature.