37 pointsby robtherobber6 hours ago4 comments

cjs_ac5 hours ago
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.
cousinbryce5 hours ago
We should name them after oil company execs
VCFundedGenYer5 hours ago
Words are words. The term does what it says on the tin. No change is needed. Article is whiney.
- Daishiman3 hours ago
  "Words are words" are something only a profoundly ignorant person would say.
  - ASalazarMX3 hours ago
    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.
    t0bia_s2 hours ago
    What about armageddon? Or heatpocalypse?
    Daishimanan hour ago
    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.
    owebmaster19 minutes ago
    Do you think another word, stronger this time, will motivate "people" to do more? (Not the companies, which should be compelled by governments).
antibull6 hours ago
[dead]