Daily Mail (Link) - Carol Driver (September 17, 2010)
Global warming could be a thing of the past, thanks to the Barack Obama administration.
No, the White House has not single-handedly managed to stop the apparent rising temperature – but it does think the terminology oversimplifies the problem.
According to U.S. science adviser John Holdren, the public should start using the phrase ‘global climate disruption’ because it makes the situation sound more dangerous.
During a speech in Oslo, Norway, Mr Holdren said global warming is a ‘dangerous misnomer’ and is not an accurate description of the issues facing the planet.
It comes as Congress prepares to adjourn for the season without completing work on the stalled climate bill, which, after facing a barrage of obstacles, was declared effectively dead in the Senate in July.
But advisers believe using the new terminology could help to drive the message to ordinary people - and put the bill back on the agenda for next year’s legislative session.
Referring to the Democrats launch of a new logo, Republican pollster Adam Geller told Fox News: ‘They’re trying to come up with more politically palatable ways to sell some of this stuff.’
Mr Geller added that the phrase ‘global warming’ is easy to criticise.
‘Every time we’re digging our cars out – what global warming? (Global climate disruption is) more of a sort of generic blanket term, I guess, that can apply in all weather conditions.’
Mr Holdren is not the first scientist to make the recommendations. In 2008, NASA said the term ‘global warming’ should be avoided because temperature change ‘isn’t the most severe effect of changing climate.’
‘Changes to precipitation patterns and sea levels are likely to have much greater human impact than the higher temperatures alone,’ its report said.
It’s not the first terminology change the White House has pushed for – previous examples include ‘man-caused disaster’ and ‘overseas contingency operation.’