Please don’t drag the insane down to this level. This is planned and intentional (even if there is factional opposition)

It’s a huge difference

Google’s dodging the question, seems like no.

Does it rhyme, and do you vocalize the j or pronounce like an English y?

The moral of this story: pee on your dog

I’m not really trying to argue the technical correctness of these terms, rather their effectiveness as rhetoric.

That was always a dumb argument that no one genuinely found confusing. It was always a red herring.

The Bush administration pushed the “climate change, not global warming” narrative (I’m not saying they invented it, only that they spearheaded the rhetorical framing and made it popular)

It’s undeniable that the end result of changing this framing is that fewer people believe now that changes should be made to mitigate long term effects of carbon emissions than 25 years ago.

Yeah, people are broadly dumb, that’s exactly why it’s important rhetorically to make the tone of your message match the severity.

It’s not more descriptive though, at least not to the layperson, it leaves room for people to believe that a change in climate is benign or tolerable. Everyone can understand that consistent, long-term warming is dangerous.

Abandoning “Global Warming” rhetoric in favor of the conservative framing of “Climate Change” was a huge tactical error.

There’s no loophole like the poophole

English is three other languages in a trench coat