Alarmists certainly prefer the term 'climate change' now that the world is no longer warming. For 30 years they screeched about WARMING and all of their failed climate models predicted WARMING but now they want us to forget all the propaganda about warming.

Now they want to call it 'climate change' --- which is of course a meaningless term because the climate has ALWAYS changed. But this new name they are trying to push on the public would allow them to have it both ways. No matter what the climate did, they could say it was due to ---- scary 'climate change' --- and of course loudly state that humans were somehow responsible.

No one should allow the Alarmists the slightest amount of leeway on this attempt to re-brand their SCAM. They predicted GLOBAL WARMING for decades --- they screeched ---- GLOBAL WARMING for decades, so global warming it is.

-----------------------

I am not sure that the world is no longer warming. This becomes one of those games as to which set of data you want to use over which period of time. Clearly the RSS data shows no warming and has 1998 as the warmest. Others have different results.

What I can say with certainty is that here has been no statistically significant change over the past 15 years. Further, I can say that the current temperatures in no way match the ideology of exponential (far greater than linear) warming that has been predicted by the IPCC and most all of the models.

If 70% of models in any field of science tended towards either over or underestimating, I would highly suspect bias. The warmers are dealing with 95% of the models overestimating and will not even admit that skeptics have good reason to be skeptical of their models. This is a type of bias that should not be present in any field of science.

A more appropriate question would be "Is it 'climate science' or is it 'political science'?"

Climate scientists have clearly stated that they still know very little about the climate and what drives it. Adding 1 part of CO2 in 10,000 to the atmosphere over the past 100 years and correlating it to the 'ebbs and flows' in global average temperature fluctuations is a HUGE STRETCH of IMAGINATION by climate science manipulators.

I prefer to call it "crony environmental climate scientists tilting temperature charts whichever direction suits their political objective and/or agenda". The climate warms and cools. The climate changes also. There's not much forcing influence on temperatures by humans. Let them call it what they want to. They're not going to "change" the climate no matter what they think they can "try".

http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a0105...

It just goes to show that the the Government dedicated billions of dollars to study global warming . But if they call it climate change they can spend billions more . And some sort of victory. for the politations who faught on the front lines of the global warming war don't laugh to hard

Nope...as both are seriously misleading.

No choice. But note that G.W. Bush preferred "Climate Change" because it sounded less ominous.

You can all believe whatever b.s. you want.... Just keep me out of it! Stop telling me I can't use cheap light bulbs and washing machines that actually work and air conditioning coolant that works and soap that works and btw...... Stop telling me from the seat of your private jet on the way to your fall home to start downsizing and btw, stop jacking up the price of my electricity so you can put money in the pockets of your scummy friends. Oh, heres one, stop bringing up the price of regular cars and trucks to offset the money needed to throw down the hallway of electric cars that nobody owns..

" now that the Earth is no longer warming"

LOL

Conservative media is now just making things up about climate scientists

How about climate hoax?

Science does not depend on fake semantical trickery.

it still is warming, there never was a pause.

conservatives lie and science doesn't