Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

2026 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #27

Posted on 5 July 2026 by BaerbelW, Doug Bostrom

A listing of 29 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, June 28, 2026 thru Sat, July 4, 2026.

Stories we promoted this week, by category:

Climate Change Impacts (11 articles)

Climate Policy and Politics (4 articles)

Health Aspects of Climate Change (4 articles)

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation (3 articles)

Climate Science and Research (3 articles)

Miscellaneous (3 articles)

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Solutions (1 article)

If you happen upon high quality climate-science and/or climate-myth busting articles from reliable sources while surfing the web, please feel free to submit them via this Google form so that we may share them widely. Thanks!

0 0

Printable Version  |  Link to this page

Comments

Comments 1 to 1:

  1. Thank you for continuing to compile and share this record of News Items.

    As an Engineer with an MBA I developed an awareness of the importance of limiting how harmful a pursuit of benefit can be, and a related awareness of how competition for power, wealth, and other perceptions of superiority can encourage and excuse harmful unsustainable pursuits of benefit.

    The following misleading claim-making presented in Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation News Item 'But we're just 1% of emissions': do smaller countries' climate efforts matter? is indeed a problem.

    “When our share of global emissions is less than 1%,” Rishi Sunak argued when he was the UK prime minister in 2023, “how can it be right that British citizens are now being told to sacrifice even more than others?”

    But that type of misleading trouble-making is happening on more issues than the required corrections of harmful developments that Climate Science has exposed and improved the understanding of. And addressing misleading claims requires the issue to be appropriately framed.

    The framing needs to along the lines of:

    Why should a person try to be less harmful and more helpful than their peers or people perceived to be superior to them?

    Shouldn't people aspire to be like those who are perceived to be superior?

    I would go further than the re-framing of the issue that is done in the following quote from the article:

    Climate scientists point to the much larger historical emissions of these countries – the metric that matters most for global heating – as well as the fact that these countries have more money to cut pollution. Per person, European countries have contributed a disproportionate amount to emissions, and progress in cleaning their economies is only now bringing annual emissions close to the global average.

    The following later quote is in the direction of better re-framing, by focusing more on the harms that can be done by members of the wealthier and more powerful portion of a population.

    “These leaders wouldn’t like it if the top 1% of their wealthiest citizens didn’t pay their taxes, so the argument is fallacious and simply buck-passing,” said Prof Piers Forster, a climate scientist at the University of Leeds. “Future warming is driven by future emissions, so every tonne of carbon dioxide that a country or citizen can avoid emitting will improve temperature and heatwave outcomes for generations.”

    The following quote at the end of the article is an even better re-framing of the issue.

    Dr Ella Gilbert, a climate scientist and ECIU board member, said: … “The UK may account for just 1% of current global emissions, but we’re responsible for 100% of our own emissions, and we have the opportunity to show global leadership by bringing them down.”

    A logical extension of ‘why do I/we have to be less harmful when the harm done by my/our pursuit of personal benefit or enjoyment is small or others are more harmful and less helpful is: Why should I/we (all people) try to be less harmful and more helpful to Others?

    Logically, and ethically and morally, the most harmful and least helpful portion of any population relative to their capacity to be helpful and harmful needs to be required to change the most, even if that change reduces perceptions of their superiority relative to Others.

    The highest status needs to be given to the people who are ‘The least harmful and most helpful to Others relative to their ability to be helpful, their wealth and power’. It can be very harmful to ‘simply’ correlate wealth or power to ‘status’.

    To maintain a perception of superiority, a wealthier and more powerful person should be required to be less harmful and more helpful than their wealth and power peers, and be significantly less harmful and more helpful to Others than people with less power and wealth.

    A key is to frame the discussion to be about the most harmful individuals. Very harmful individuals can be expected to try to hide their harmfulness as part of a larger collective.

    Another important framing is to recognize that the very harmful people in a diversity of regional populations can be expected to try to act collectively for ‘their benefit’ to the detriment of all Others, even if the regions they hide in appear to be in conflict.

    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2026 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us