This is a news article about a journalist using a more intensive adjective to describe an intensified phenomenon. The original Reuters article would probably have been more compelling reading.
This summer I’ve seen many people miffed (or worse) but the usage of the Italian equivalent of “heatwave” in the media coverage: both general news and meteorologists insisted that “the fourth heat wave was finally passing” or that “a fifth heat wave was looming” while the general experience was that it was insufferably hot from may until September, with little to no relief. It felt like a cruel joke.
Hmm. So, they suggest we move from the term “heat wave” to “heat storm”. Is that the right move? Is that the right analogy?
If they’re getting bigger and more destructive, then wouldn’t a better term be “heat tsunami”? Is there something else between a “wave” and a “tsunami” or “tidal wave”?
If they’re getting larger in size and more omnipresent, then wouldn’t a better term be “sea of heat” or maybe “ocean of heat”? Or is there a better term that sits between “wave” and “sea”?
Or maybe, if they’re getting larger are getting longer in time and more destructive, we should be talking about “heat monsoons”?
Or, maybe it’s the word “heat” that needs to change? If stuff is getting hotter, maybe we need to switch to “inferno”? Or perhaps “Hellfire”? Maybe there are other heat-related words that we should be using instead?
The term “heat storm” just seems so … anodyne. Small. Minimal. Bigger than a heat wave, okay. But still, not in keeping with the magnitude of the problem that seems to be facing this entire planet.
Seems to me like we need someone with a bigger thesaurus looking at this issue and helping us come up with a lot more options for what we are now seeing.
The article has nothing to do with the literal specific meaning of one word and everything to do with how people consume and relate to climate change messaging. That's not "words", and it actually requires a good deal more thinking.
Well marketing evidently moves a huge amount of the populance and it requires very few but extremely well-placed phrases and slogans to work so yeah. You just need to move a small fraction of the voting population to shift the political panorama.
This is a news article about a journalist using a more intensive adjective to describe an intensified phenomenon. The original Reuters article would probably have been more compelling reading.
This summer I’ve seen many people miffed (or worse) but the usage of the Italian equivalent of “heatwave” in the media coverage: both general news and meteorologists insisted that “the fourth heat wave was finally passing” or that “a fifth heat wave was looming” while the general experience was that it was insufferably hot from may until September, with little to no relief. It felt like a cruel joke.
Hmm. So, they suggest we move from the term “heat wave” to “heat storm”. Is that the right move? Is that the right analogy?
If they’re getting bigger and more destructive, then wouldn’t a better term be “heat tsunami”? Is there something else between a “wave” and a “tsunami” or “tidal wave”?
If they’re getting larger in size and more omnipresent, then wouldn’t a better term be “sea of heat” or maybe “ocean of heat”? Or is there a better term that sits between “wave” and “sea”?
Or maybe, if they’re getting larger are getting longer in time and more destructive, we should be talking about “heat monsoons”?
Or, maybe it’s the word “heat” that needs to change? If stuff is getting hotter, maybe we need to switch to “inferno”? Or perhaps “Hellfire”? Maybe there are other heat-related words that we should be using instead?
The term “heat storm” just seems so … anodyne. Small. Minimal. Bigger than a heat wave, okay. But still, not in keeping with the magnitude of the problem that seems to be facing this entire planet.
Seems to me like we need someone with a bigger thesaurus looking at this issue and helping us come up with a lot more options for what we are now seeing.
We should name them after oil company execs
[dead]
Words are words. The term does what it says on the tin. No change is needed. Article is whiney.
"Words are words" are something only a profoundly ignorant person would say.
This made me picture the IQ Bell Curve meme.
- Left: Words are words
- Middle: Only a profoundly ignorant person would say [that]
- Right: Words are words
We could still use "heatwave" with a magnitude suffix, like hurricanes. It's likely "heat storms" will need the magnitude suffix anyway.
What about armageddon? Or heatpocalypse?
The article has nothing to do with the literal specific meaning of one word and everything to do with how people consume and relate to climate change messaging. That's not "words", and it actually requires a good deal more thinking.
Do you think another word, stronger this time, will motivate "people" to do more? (Not the companies, which should be compelled by governments).
Well marketing evidently moves a huge amount of the populance and it requires very few but extremely well-placed phrases and slogans to work so yeah. You just need to move a small fraction of the voting population to shift the political panorama.
The natural state of the earth is to have no polar icecaps. The earth is currently in an ice-age.
More people die of cold than of heat.
Stop with the fearmongering.