The advertising and public relations gurus -- modern-day fabulists, people who write fictional short stories to illustrate a moral -- who are paid to put a positive spin on failed political ideologies are now hard at work trying to “re-brand” global warming  to scare or shock people into ceding power to politicians who want to expand government, raise taxes to confiscatory levels, restrict inalienable rights and personal liberty, and worst of all, nullify the constitution that protects people from their government. All to create a rationale for creating a mythical utopia that transcends human nature and can never exist in the real world.


Perhaps instead of using terms like global meltdown and climate collapse to describe the already re-branded global warming (now global climate change), they might try for a modicum of “truth in advertising” and re-brand global climate change as communism 3.0 after the failure of communism 1.0 (Russia -- Lenin and Stalin; China – Mao; North Korea -- Kim family) and the failure of communism 2.0 (Cuba -- Castro and Venezuela -- Maduro).

Renaming climate change: Can a new name finally make us take action?

As a professional namer, I create names for companies, products and services. After the global climate strike this past September, I found myself thinking about the terms “climate change” and “global warming.” Are these scientific terms too neutral? Do they do enough to grab attention and inspire people to take action?

[OCS: A professional bullsh*t artist might be an appropriate title. And, “climate change” and “global warming” are not scientific terms by any stretch of the imagination.]

Scientific terms often fail to resonate in meaningful ways. In the early 1900s, for example, no one had heard of the "hypothesis of the primeval atom." That changed in the 1940s when the term “Big Bang” was coined, which was a simpler, more relatable concept for the masses. This complex scientific concept is extremely well-known today because a better, more tangible term was applied to it. Can we use lessons from the naming of the Big Bang to rebrand “climate change?”

[OCS: I wonder if the author understands that the “Big Bang” is still only a theory and that cosmological scientific data is constantly changing how we understand our universe?]

A short history lesson: Scientists once used the term “inadvertent climate modification” to refer to subtle changes in global climate patterns caused by humans. During the 1970s, the scientific community created two new terms: global warming (the increase in Earth’s average surface temperature) and climate change (a long-term change in the Earth’s climate).

[OCS: These terms are short-hand descriptions much like acronyms to promote somewhat of a common understanding of the subject matter – not it’s validity or falseness. Names do not equate to scientific truth or even agreement among scientists.]

Originally, politicians latched onto global warming because it sounded more worrisome (the Earth is heating too fast). But it was too easy to poke holes in because the Earth was also getting colder. During polar vortex storms, skeptics often tweet that it "sure would be nice for some of that 'global warming' right about now." Politicians then pivoted to “climate change.” This concept was less easy to deny, but also less compelling and less actionable.

[OCS: Politicians corrupting and using science to advance an ideology, their own agenda, and, of course, to siphon-off massive amounts of public money to give to the “right” special interests who supported their incumbency and political efforts.]

This leads me to wonder: Is there a better way to convey the urgency of the situation, while also encouraging folks to take action? Could the tools of branding and brand naming create a more resonant, powerful name? Our naming team decided to give it whirl, but first, we set some parameters and guideposts, as we would with any new brand name project:

[OCS: Urgency is a hard concept to consider when most climate change occurs over eons and if you ceased all human activity today, the results may not even be detectible a thousand, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years from now. The likelihood or a major asteroid strike, a global pandemic, or a global catastrophic event is almost as certain as the climate-induced end of civilization as we know it.] 

Reach: The new name needs to speak to a global threat affecting 7.5 billion humans. As such, our global team of namers from London, New York, San Francisco and Shanghai developed these new names.

[OCS: You mean people living in a bubble where group-think is actually more prevalent that reading the scientific literature and developing your own viewpoints?

I wonder what the people in China, Russia, and India – the major global polluters – actually think as they see the United States cripple itself over a specious theory?]

Audience: The brand needs to reach an audience that isn’t trained in scientific terms. We need these folks to understand the severity of what’s happening to their planet and inspire them to make more eco-friendly life choices and pro-climate choices at the ballot box.

[OCS: Un-effin-belivable. “Trained in scientific terms.” This reminds me of what Richard Feynman, the Nobel laurate and physicist used to say: “Knowing the name of something doesn't mean you understand it.” ]

Message: There are many possible themes, tones and styles of names to explore. The name could signal hope, fear or change. It could be a call to action, be more descriptive or use familiar metaphors that emotionally connect us to the issue.

With all of this in mind, our team of wordsmiths developed the following new names for climate change:

Global Meltdown, Global Melting

These options are subtle brand shifts from "global warming," yet they deliver a more negative image. The names signal that ice caps are melting, but also create a more visceral image in the mind -- that real feeling of “melting” when it’s too hot outside. A meltdown is a disastrous event that draws from the ultimate terror of a nuclear meltdown, an apt metaphor for global destruction. In naming, we call metaphorical names "suggestive names," and they are one of the most popular types of names.

[OCS: How about Global Insanity?]

Climate Collapse, Climate Chaos

Good brand names instill a clear message or even a direct call to action. Perhaps that's why climate change isn’t powerful enough: “Change” sounds so neutral. However, there’s nothing neutral about collapse or chaos. Both are states of events that you absolutely want to avoid. They ask each of us to do what it takes to avoid collapsing or descending into chaos. They both also use alliteration -- using the same letter or sound at the beginning of connected words -- a naming trick proven to enhance memorability.

[OCS: How about Political Fraud?]

Boiling Point, Melting Point

Arresting brand names often capitalize on vivid visual associations. They refer to a tipping point that we’re catapulting toward and must find a way to avert. Because a boiling point is the point at which liquid vaporizes, it brings forth imagery of rivers, lakes and oceans boiling and disappearing. "Melting Point" paints a clear picture of solid matter melting. As glaciers melt and disappear, so does our way of life.

[OCS: How about Bucket of Sh*t?"]

Scorched Earth

It's time to take the gloves off and stop pretending. Sometimes a brand name needs to be hyperbolic to truly capture hearts and minds. If we don’t take massive action now, Earth will be uninhabitable -- an irreversible barren wasteland. Plants and animals will die. Humans won’t be able to survive extreme weather like floods, droughts and fires. If we don’t change, we won’t even be able to spend time outside. "Scorched Earth" paints the direst picture of what’s to come and what we must avoid and is likely the edgiest brand name from our exploration.

[OCS: This one makes sense – because like General Sherman’s march to the sea, where his scorched earth policy left life uninhabitable – all you will have after the politicians implement their public policies is death, destruction, and the equality of shared misery.]

The following honorable mentions represent creative outliers that lean on metaphor and wordplay to capture attention, a naming style that is sure to make a brand stand out:

Emission Critical: Focuses on the action we need to take: reducing emissions.

Planet Critical: Draws on a familiar concept of a critical condition.

Pre-Extinction: Powerful and suggests another mass extinction is imminent if we do not change our ways today.

The Great Collapse: The collapse of ecosystems, economies and our way of life.

Earthshattering: Creatively arresting -- the complete destruction of the Earth as we know it.

[OCS: Cute and clever – just like those being paid to sit around and spitball new names for old concepts. You know, the people who believe it is creative and innovative to slap the word “New and Improved” on the old product after the addition of fairy dust.

The above honorable mentions are pathetic and their creators should be embarrassed to have even mentioned them out loud.]

Whatever we call it, impending climate doom is upon us if we don’t act quickly. Global leaders have been sluggish, and by and large, individuals have failed to see the need for immediate action. But maybe branding can help. Perhaps a new name will shift the needle, even if just a little.

[OCS: Not only does the author assume a conclusion based on facts not in evidence, he is actually selling death, destruction, and future misery to the world as the end-point of government intervention becomes totalitarian dictatorships.]


Bottom line…

How about another truthful terms – bullsh*t – to describe a phenomenon that exists only in the minds of activist researchers and their flawed computer models and dodgy data? The truth is that the climate is always changing and has since the Earth developed oceans and an atmosphere. There is no doubt than man – and cow farts – impact the ecosphere as to be expected. But not one researcher can identify, quantify, and measure man’s contribution to the climate amid climate’s natural variability.

We look at the terrestrial dataset and find that the original data is missing and all that remains is highly manipulated (homogenized) data that disagrees with other datasets gathered by global satellites and localized weather balloons.  We find ocean temperatures being measured by using the cooling water of ocean-going ship as an acceptable proxy. Or tree rings, coral growth, and ice cores as a way to characterize temperatures before thermometers. All fraught with major error intervals that exceed the temperatures measured or expected. Show me temperature measurements with a decimal point and I will show you crap data where the decimal point comes – not from measurement – but from a mathematical artifact created when you divide numbers to produce an average.We are just fine and are at the mercy of nature – it is what it is – and the Earth has been hotter, colder, with more and less atmospheric carbon dioxide. Man needs to do what he does best: ADAPT. Want to reduce the costs of those major weather events? Try tougher zoning laws and building codes – and watch for crooked politicians and massive contributions from developers.

As for the author and his ilk – there is a reason they are called hucksters. In advertising, the most powerful word is “YOU.” And if you ask me, if you cede your individual freedoms to corrupt politicians, I guarantee (another powerful word in advertising) that YOU are screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell