Warmist doomsday cult trying yet another re-branding

Apparently not enough people are convinced that we have only 12 years left before the world ends.

The first brand identity of the doomsday cultists had it that “global warming” was going to kill us all. But alas, it produced laughable claims, such as the “end of snow,” that were endlessly refuted by Mother Nature.  


And there was the humiliating “Gore Effect,” described by Urban Dictionary as:

The phenomenon that leads to unseasonably cold temperatures, driving rain, hail, or snow whenever Al Gore visits an area to discuss global warming. Hence, the Gore Effect.

- Australia, November 2006: Al Gore is visiting two weeks before summer begins. The Gore Effect strikes: "Ski resort operators gazed at the snow in amazement. Parents took children out of school and headed for the mountains. Cricketers scurried amidbullets of hail as Melburnians traded lunchtime tales of the incredible cold." (The Age) 

- New York, March 2004: "Gore chose January 15, 2004, one of the coldest days in New York City's history, to rail against the Bush administration and global warming skeptics... Global warming, Gore told a startled audience, is causing record cold temperatures." (NY Environment News)

There's nothing quite like laughter to puncture pomposity and appeals to authority.  So, the scare-mongers abandoned “global warming” as the boogeyman and rolled out their New Coke: “Climate change.” But that has proven to be as much of a dud as New Coke. Golly-gee-whiz, it’s not scary enough. There are still plenty of people who don’t get excited. So, now we have the new New Coke: “climate emergency,” now being test marketed as  Michael Bastasch reports in the Daily Caller:

Telemundo, the second-largest Spanish language U.S. television network, will now use “climate emergency” to describe global warming, citing the “scientific community and linguistics experts.”

This comes one month after The Guardian, a prominent U.K. newspaper, discarded climate change in favor of more alarming terms, like “climate emergency, crisis or breakdown.”

It’s still the same hoax, and the propagandists hyping it fall back on the usual trick of confusing actual science with allegations of a phony consensus:

“The scientific community and linguistics experts agree that the world is facing a ‘climate emergency,'” Fernández said. “Terms such as ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ do not fully reflect this reality, and at Noticias Telemundo we are true to our commitment to tell things as they are.”

The Guardian editor-in-chief Katharine Viner made a similar argument when announcing her outlet’s move to more alarming rhetoric.

“The phrase ‘climate change,’ for example, sounds rather passive and gentle when what scientists are talking about is a catastrophe for humanity,” Viner said in May.

Translation: "New Coke" was not such a good idea. Especially when New York City is not under water, drought is not permanent, and the other claims of apocalypse have not played out.

The con is getting harder to sustain, so they are yelling louder.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com