“Climate Change” vs. “Global Warming”

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. The term “Climate Change” is more accurate, since the symptoms include hurricanes, floods and blizzards as well as hotter temperatures. But the general public is more alarmed and willing to act when they hear “Global Warming.”

“Climate Change” sounds too cerebral, too detached. “Global Warming” is more alarming, more galvanizing, but it opens the door for millions of inbred dunces to recite — on cue — “It snowed last night. So much for that there 'global warming' they keep talking about, huh huh huh uh uh uh.”

However, one particular group is extremely motivated by the term “Climate Change” — the Canadian government.  Stephen Harper's (no relation) administration is sooo alarmed by the term “Climate Change” that government meteorologists are not allowed to talk about it.  Period.  It's OK if a meteorologist mentions a specific weather event — a storm, flood, drought, etc.  But they are not allowed to say or imply that there's a larger pattern involved — i.e. “Climate Change” — or that fossil fuel consumption just might could maybe have something to do with it.

In fact, all government scientists are required to get permission from the federal government before they can speak to a reporter.  And they're told very clearly which answers they can and cannot give.

And for some odd reason, media coverage of climate change issues has decreased by eighty percent since Stephen Harper started muzzling Canadian scientists.  Andrew Nikiforuk, an award-winning journalists who's spent twenty years reporting on Canada's oil and gas industry, said:

“We have a government of thugs in Ottawa these days who are absolutely ruthless.  It’s a hostility and thuggery, is the way I would describe it. That’s exactly what it is.”

Anyone still think Canada is “better” or less corporate-owned than the U.S.?