What would alarmists prefer to be called?

Why do you need to call them (or anyone) anything?? People either agree with the scientific theory of AGW or don't.

Address questions asked without labelling people, that is address the question than rather trying to insult or stereotype a person. Address the person (asker) as an individual and not a label.

This of course rings true for everyone ... this board is full of name calling, and very few people actual care about the science. They each are trying to score brownie points rather than actually address the question at hand. Some people love posting the same answer for every question they answer on these boards (do they even read the questions anymore)??

I don't see what is wrong with alarmists. I suppose it could tend to mean that they are alarmed over nothing or overly alarmed about something. It certainly wasn't dreamed up to compare them to Holocaust deniers.

We can't use warmunist since it is too much like communist

Warmon is like Mormon referring to religious like and to some make a cult.

I have heard Warm mongers but most clearly don't like war. They are closer to the anti-war crowd so that one doesn't work.

Some would like you to call them realists. Interestingly that is what some socialists call themselves.

They only listen to half the facts so we could call them the tone deaf but that doesn't have a good ring to it.

Hmmmm.

Nope I can't come up with any better than alarmists so I will wait until something better comes along.

I've always thought it silly that that deniers call science literates "alarmists" because deniers are the most alarmist people I know. You guys practically tell us that life as we know it will end if we do something to stop global warming.

If you don't like being called a denier, don't deny.

Global warming is happening

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/images/wa...

And we are causing it

http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/fil...

The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2011 and 2012.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

I always laugh when they call themselves "realists" since all alarmists HATE reality. Their whole shtick is making dire predictions to scare people into believing their religion. When reality doesn't cooperate with them they just double down and make yet another prediction of climate catastrophe.

"Alarmist" is not offensive. Most people called "alarmists" are not alarmed, but some are, and the press is notorious for throwing sensationalistic words like "alarming" into articles about climate change whenever possible.

What is offensive is endlessly lying about science.

U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12782&...

“Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems.”

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsite...

“Choices made now about carbon dioxide emissions reductions will affect climate change impacts experienced not just over the next few decades but also in coming centuries and millennia…Because CO2 in the atmosphere is long lived, it can effectively lock the Earth and future generations into a range of impacts, some of which could become very severe.”

http://www.physics.fsu.edu/awards/NAS/

“The Academy membership is composed of approximately 2,100 members and 380 foreign associates, of whom nearly 200 have won Nobel Prizes.

Members and foreign associates of the Academy are elected in recognition of their distinguished and continuing achievements in original research; election to the Academy is considered one of the highest honors that can be accorded a scientist or engineer.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_ch...

http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200602/bac...

http://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoices/events...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_Review

http://nas-sites.org/climate-change/qanda.html#.U2...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Science literates is ******* hillarious when these litetates are too stupid to figure out what they are signing before they sign a petition to ban water. Denier is actually the better term for those who ignore reality and pretend to have a clue about science.

Greenies should suffice. It beats calling them ignoramuses, which they clearly are. It beats calling them foolish ones, which they clearly are. It beats calling them communist proponents, which they clearly are. It beats calling them Al Gorists, which they clearly are. It beats calling them simpletons, which they clearly are. We could truly call them rubes or suckers or even marks for falling for such an obvious scam. However, some of these on this site are the con artists and some are the rubes so that wouldn't be exactly truthful.

Greenies covers most all aspects of those who oppose true science and support Al Gore who is going green in the wallet.

As for me. You can call me anything. I am not offended because I have been proven right.

Alarmists have nothing good to bring to the table. That's why they "alarm" people with their apocalyptic statements (Hence, the word "alarmist").

It is a very simple issue to me.

Catastrophic global warming is a hypothesis, based on computer models. Some people believe this hypothesis to be true, others are skeptical. So we have believers and skeptics.