On Apr 6, 1:46*pm, AzzMazta wrote:
On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 21:50:43 -0700, bpnjensen wrote:
On Apr 3, 6:31*pm, AzzMazta wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 19:38:49 -0700, bpnjensen wrote:
the term is "climate change" or "climate
forcing," "global warming" is a misnomer that is perpetuated by
people for whom it pays to cause misinformation to persist.

As evidenced by the newsgroup I CC'ed the reply to.

That's not the point, cement-head. *You have no clue what you're talking
about, as proven by your totally outdated jargon that even the
knowledgeable naysayers left behind years ago.

So the name of the newsgroup is a dated term? From what I understand the
word "global warming" is still used by the media, even by believers. Most
people are finally admitting it's not-warming-everywhere "climate change"
now?

Also, you in the group keep referring to the effect of CFCs on the ozone
as "dated", I know they are banned now, but I was referring to how only
using the word "warm" could link the climate change issue to holes
created by greenhouse gases in the minds of non-intellectuals (such as
politicians). Thus "Global Warming" becomes a platform plank where we
need to (de)regulate business activity based on more than just short-term
health problems. "Climate Change" is harder to prove.

--

AzzMazta's Political Institute
Verbal Diarrhea & More
Washington, DC
(http://www.xcopfly.com/)

Now I know why your signature has "verbal diarrhea" in it.