Either? Or?

This little post is in answer to a comment Jenn(of the Jungle) left on a cartoon post of mine last week: Berkeley Breathed on Global Warming. One truly never knows what will spark a comment from a dedicated wingnut like Jenn, this was her acerbic little note on what I thought was a totally harmless posting: "Funny, I read that cartoon this weekend and thought it was funny. I find it odd though that you ignore the other parts and focus only on the fallacy of global warming, which, you as a good little lefty should know by now has been changed to 'global climate crisis'." So, for you, Jenn, I link to this article 'Climate Change’ or ‘Global Warming’? by Erika Bolstad of the McClatchy Newspapers. It's an interesting exploration of the two terms, how they are used, and who uses them. However, as one of the commenters at the end of the article (a "Mr. Pickwick") notes:

the thought that climate change is accelerating is, or should be, very frightening indeed. But warming is the mechanism which is changing the climate, and I tend to use both depending on context.In a house fire, whether you die from heat or inhaling gases is academic.

I couldn't agree more, Mr. Pickwick. Or, we could all follow our (P)Resident's lead and just lump the terms all together:

I think that the president uses both,” Hellmer said. “I can recall him saying both ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change.’ And I know that the president has said ‘global climate warming.

We could even go him one better and say "global climate warming crisis" couldn't we?

Technorati Tags: Berkeley Breathed, climate change, global warming, nitpicking terms

| +Save/Share | |