My chemistry professor insisted we call it climate disruption.

When you start talking about 'framing' the conversation, you also start loosing my interest. "Framing" and "spinning" revolve around pushing a specific agenda or viewpoint. I detest it, I don't care what your take is on something, if you want to pretend you favor the scientific method, you've gotta accept the evidence standing on it's own with out having to frame it a particular way.

Unfortunately, you yourself have just attempted to frame the conversation around the idea of "evidence standing on its own without having to frame it in a particular way."

See how perfidious this is? Not as easy as you suggest!


>> ^bcglorf:

When you start talking about 'framing' the conversation, you also start loosing my interest. "Framing" and "spinning" revolve around pushing a specific agenda or viewpoint. I detest it, I don't care what your take is on something, if you want to pretend you favor the scientific method, you've gotta accept the evidence standing on it's own with out having to frame it a particular way.