<p>&quot;What's in a name <sup>1</sup>?&quot;</p>
<p>My initial &quot;remembrance&quot;, thanks to the mass media, was that the term global warming was first introduced in the early 1970s and that it was a controversial term amongst conservatives because the implications were industry and science were responsible for &quot;something bad&quot;, which ultimately could affect their investments and incomes. So as to make the affects on the world seems less contentious they introduced the term climate change.</p>
<p>It appears <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">the situation</a> was a little different.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/the-name-game-from-global-warming-to-climate-change-/97908" rel="nofollow noreferrer">In the 1960s</a>, &quot;concerns over CO<sub>2</sub>-induced climate change begin to mount in the United States and the Soviet Union&quot;.</p>
<p>The term “inadvertent climate modification” started being used in the late 1960s and early 1970s. One example being the title of a Swedish study titled <em>Inadvertent Climate Modification: Report of the Study of Man's Impact on Climate (SMIC)&quot; is one example of the terms use</em>.</p>
<p>The term “inadvertent climate modification” was being used by scientists</p>
<blockquote>
<p>because while many scientists accepted that human activities could cause climate change, they did not know what the direction of change might be. Industrial emissions of tiny airborne particles called aerosols might cause cooling, while greenhouse gas emissions would cause warming. Which effect would dominate?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The term &quot;global warming&quot; was first used in 1975 by Wallace Broecker in a article titled, <em>Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?</em></p>
<p>A 1979 study by the National Academy of Science, called the Charney Report, stated,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>if carbon dioxide continues to increase, [we find] no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible.&quot;</p>
<p>When referring to surface temperature change, Charney used &quot;global warming.&quot; When discussing the many other changes that would be induced by increasing carbon dioxide, Charney used &quot;climate change.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These terms are still used in scientific journals.</p>
<p>In the late 1980s, the term &quot;global change&quot; was introduced.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This term encompassed many other kinds of change in addition to climate change.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p><sup>1</sup>? <a href="https://nosweatshakespeare.com/quotes/soliloquies/whats-in-a-name/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Thanks to Shakespeare</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-29T03:06:45.463Z
Is there a link for the global change definition?  Would be interesting to see where it's given.
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-28T12:15:57.527Z
2022-07-28T12:15:57.527Z
Fred
<p>I was just wondering whether it wouldn't make more sense to describe climate change as global change. After all, it is not only the air temperature that has been changing in recent years, but also ice caps that are melting and storms that are increasing, etc. So although this change is all dependent on the climate, it is much more complex. Or is science already naming this global change?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-28T20:18:46.860Z
"global" would be misleading, as it would imply that *everything* will change, which is not necessarily the case. I don't think climate change will have an impact on tectonic plate motion, or on Earth's magnetic field, just to name a few systems.
Jean-Marie Prival
<climate-change>
Global change or climate change
Weiss
# Global change or climate change

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-07-28)

I was just wondering whether it wouldn't make more sense to describe climate change as global change. After all, it is not only the air temperature that has been changing in recent years, but also ice caps that are melting and storms that are increasing, etc. So although this change is all dependent on the climate, it is much more complex. Or is science already naming this global change?

**Tags:** climate-change

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: "global" would be misleading, as it would imply that *everything* will change, which is not necessarily the case. I don't think climate change will have an impact on tectonic plate motion, or on Earth's magnetic field, just to name a few systems.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-07-28. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

"What's in a name 1?"

My initial "remembrance", thanks to the mass media, was that the term global warming was first introduced in the early 1970s and that it was a controversial term amongst conservatives because the implications were industry and science were responsible for "something bad", which ultimately could affect their investments and incomes. So as to make the affects on the world seems less contentious they introduced the term climate change.

It appears [the situation](https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html) was a little different.

[In the 1960s](https://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/the-name-game-from-global-warming-to-climate-change-/97908), "concerns over CO2-induced climate change begin to mount in the United States and the Soviet Union".

The term “inadvertent climate modification” started being used in the late 1960s and early 1970s. One example being the title of a Swedish study titled *Inadvertent Climate Modification: Report of the Study of Man's Impact on Climate (SMIC)" is one example of the terms use*.

The term “inadvertent climate modification” was being used by scientists

> because while many scientists accepted that human activities could cause climate change, they did not know what the direction of change might be. Industrial emissions of tiny airborne particles called aerosols might cause cooling, while greenhouse gas emissions would cause warming. Which effect would dominate?

The term "global warming" was first used in 1975 by Wallace Broecker in a article titled, *Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?*

A 1979 study by the National Academy of Science, called the Charney Report, stated,

> if carbon dioxide continues to increase, [we find] no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible."
>
> When referring to surface temperature change, Charney used "global warming." When discussing the many other changes that would be induced by increasing carbon dioxide, Charney used "climate change."

These terms are still used in scientific journals.

In the late 1980s, the term "global change" was introduced.

> This term encompassed many other kinds of change in addition to climate change.

---

1? [Thanks to Shakespeare](https://nosweatshakespeare.com/quotes/soliloquies/whats-in-a-name/)

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Is there a link for the global change definition?  Would be interesting to see where it's given.  

---

