Scientific American is going to ditch boring old 'climate change' in favor of much scarier-sounding 'climate emergency' because Science™

Sarah D | 9:46 AM on April 14, 2021

Scientific American is not a scientific journal, but it’s ostensibly scientific in nature. Or at least, it used to be.

Clearly things have changed quite a bit over the past several years.

Apparently now, Science™ is about taking cues from media fearmongers:

Scientific American has agreed with major news outlets worldwide to start using the term “climate emergency” in its coverage of climate change. Read our statement about this decision, and the impact we hope it can have throughout the media landscape. https://t.co/ccpALIvpxe

— Scientific American (@sciam) April 12, 2021

Because nothing says “we’re committed to The Science™” like using terminology meant to appeal to people’s emotions rather than their reason.

Can you please provide the mathematical formula you’re using to ascertain that current climate variation now constitutes an “emergency”? Also appreciated would be any math you’re using to pinpoint the percentage of humanity’s impact on said variation.

Thanks in advance.

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 13, 2021

To justify this change of language demanding action, a scientific journal cites: hurricanes in Florida, a bursting dam, and cold weather, which isn’t climate, unless we say it is AND THIS WEATHER IS CLIMATE AND AN EMERGENCY

— Razor (@hale_razor) April 13, 2021

Was “Global Warming” not testing well anymore?

— Question EVERYTHING (@RabbitTrails) April 13, 2021

It went from "global warming" to "climate change" because things cooled off.

Now it's going from "climate change" to "climate emergency" because the "climate change" they predicted hasn't happened.

It's Fear Porn. https://t.co/uhAEhiHFJA

— RBe (@RBPundit) April 13, 2021

It’s The Science™ according to Bill Nye the Science Guy, basically.

"Fearmongering isn't working. We need MORE fearmongering!!!"

— TheRealMirCat (@TRMirCat) April 13, 2021

Science is the process of saying things that aren't true to achieve a political result. https://t.co/qgy30vmpCB

— I got your #Unity right here (@jtLOL) April 13, 2021

I preferred the days when science journals remained neutral to political influence.

— Dean Oarman (@DeanOarman) April 12, 2021

Scientific American, rebranded: Now without all the boring science! https://t.co/1SF7zt2Mpz

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 13, 2021

You should rename your magazine "Agitprop American", although I'm uncertain about the American part anymore.

— Physics Geek (@physicsgeek) April 13, 2021

They’re definitely not about science anymore.

More like @scam. Used to read you as a teenager (Dad subscribed). Would never dream of reading your tripe today. You're not Galileo, you're the church of Greta.

— ds (@nyetjgoldblum) April 13, 2021

It was your decision ~20 years ago to be a policy advocate rather than an objective source on this topic that made me reluctantly end my subscription. I still miss the magazine you used to be, and I wish I regretted my decision.

— Tim Hamilton (@TSHamiltonAstro) April 13, 2021

Maybe someday, Scientific American will regret their decision.

Until then: