It's seemed to me the terms have always been used interchangeably.
From 1975: "Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?"
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/189/4201/460
From 1979: "if carbon dioxide continues to increase, [we find] no reason to doubt that climate changes will result"
http://globalclimatechange.jpl.nasa.gov/news/index.cfm?FuseAction=ShowNews&NewsID=32
Why do so many people insist on giving so much significance to whether one term is used over another? People say it's so scientists can say that even if it gets cold, they can still say they were right, completely ignoring the actual definition: that climate change is the effect of global warming. If the planet changes its temperature, other changes in the climate system result:
http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/climate_change_2008_final.pdf
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/fq/science.html#2
I've asked this before. Can anyone provide a scrap of evidence that the above sources are wrong, and that the name was in fact recently changed?
Can anyone provide me with a single source showing how a scientist decided to start calling it 'climate change' because he/she wasn't sure if it was going to get warmer or colder? Isn't every AGW scientist saying it will get warmer, and only saying it will get warmer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Global_Warming_Predictions.png
Is this quite possibly the single worst argument the skeptics make?
Oh, sorry: "That is the question"
Bookmarks