? The blogosphere isn't poisonous--but the name may be |
| Rocketboom Splitsville Saga ?
July 05, 2006
Massive tangent here, but still in my baliwick, since I am a writer and am writing more about sustainability. Seth Godin has an interesting post about how the terminology of global warming is a problem. His point:
"1. the name.
Global is good.
Warm is good.
Even greenhouses are good places."
I think that there is a realization that this is the case. (nd also that Global Warming can be confusing since it means a warmer overall climate, but the consequence is huge weather changes....like lots of rain.) Which is why we're seeing the use of the word Climate Change. But even this doesn't get across the monumental problems we're facing.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Global Cooking? Worldwide Overheating? Planet Burn? Earth Incineration?
Good observation, Seth!
Posted by: vaspers the grate at the gates of timelessness at July 5, 2006 11:36 PM
Heather, "hothouse" is a more ominous word than greenhouse. It implies unbridled growth and a stifling atmosphere more suitable for Venus Flytraps than the likes of us.
But perhaps we should just embrace hyperboly and call it the Hell effect, or say that we're going to Hell. Then we could refer to any greenhouse effects as "hellish." And if exhaust fumes seep into our green spaces, we could score a double-entendre by saying, "Smells like Hell."
Posted by: steve baker at July 6, 2006 08:43 AM
Even "climate change" seems entirely too innocuous for what is being described. Right now, it's November in Pittsburgh, and I would enjoy a climate change.
How about "climate catastrophe"?
Posted by: Elwin Green at November 22, 2006 03:03 PM