Repeating: It has NOT changed!! It has always been "Climate change". "Global warming" was introduced in 1975 and is a subset of "climate change". (I explained this in my earlier post.)
It has been changed because the earlier claim that the earth is warming has run amuck.
(Some emoticons are fun!!)
I am not sure where the disconnect is. Reboot:
1) "Climate Change" was the original, from about late 1950 or early 1960
2) The same group that proposed "Climate Change" (as a name), also proposed "Climate Modification" to refer to increasing temperatures across the globe
3) ALL that - again - between 1960 and 1975.
4) In 1975, there was a Prof (in some eastern seaboard school) that proposed changing "Climate Modification" to "Global Warming"
As a clarification:
5) "Global Warming" refers to the rise in temperatures across the globe (air and water) and its contributing factors
6) "Climate Change" includes a rash of things: acidity in the sea, impact of plants, animals, health issues, what happened a million years ago (literally), etc. GB is a subset of CC. A Climate Change guy may or may not deal with Global Warming
IF you still do NOT get it, then:
Simple question - Has it been proven after multiple billions of dollars in studies that the globe is warming and if so has it been proven man is causing this warming?
First and foremost, it is NOT simple, on the contrary. Actually, categorizing it as such exposes oneself.
Let me put it this way: Science broadly falls under binary system (yes/no) and quantum (yes/no/maybe)(sorry for borrowing that term, but what I want to say is that it can take on a range of discrete values). Climate Change and Global Warming fall under "quantum". I sense you are expecting a binary answer. Too bad, you ain't getting one. And, you will have to live with that - that is nature of that beast. Wish it was otherwise - it would have been so simple that we would have solved it by now.
Someone here claimed there is consensus across the board on global warming.
And rightly so. The fact it can take on a range of values, leads to the need for "consensus". The analogue in binary world would be agree/disagree.
Also what scientific basis is proposed action on Climate Change based on? How is the action taking place ahead of even the most basic understanding of Earths climatic past and what changed global temperatures in the absence of man? I keep hearing we need to "combat Climate Change" which incidentally was the same nonsense I heard about combatting global warming till that ran amuck.
I'm trying to separate fact from fiction here.
I am not aware of "fiction", except among skeptics.
The model is rather simple (to explain): certain gases that are released into the atmosphere create a barrier that prevents the suns radiation from escaping back into space. The trapped energy is the basic cause of the rise in temp in the air and the oceans.
On humans contributing, they broadly fall under mobile and point/stationary - while gasoline cars are mobile sources, electric cars are point (where the electricity is generated - nuclear is an exception). Add to that the estimates of natural cycles - which is challenging - and you have a decent picture of the total contributions. (this topic - contribution from nature is very interesting. It includes things like cutting trees - which realse the stored CO2 -to hydrated natural gas which is realsed when the surrundings get warmer.) On the other side of the equation is presence of CO2, acidity in the ocean and glacial melting.
Key to all this is to remember that rise in temp or sea level is NOT global. Some places WILL record the opposite.
Anything beyond that goes into modeling, etc. Not worth it here - plenty on the net.
But, let me state this: with so many glaciers melting - especially in regions where there is no or very, very little pollution activities, with rising acidity in the oceans, etc, someone will have to answer to the political leadership. It has gone way beyond "it is a hoax" for such leaders to turn a blind eye any more. Water is the next commodity that nations will go to war and people to migrate in huge masses. Lack of water = war, too much water = migartion (BD is a great example).