I’ve heard it been said that “Global Warming” was changed to “Climate Change” because liberals wanted to prepare to keep up the Global Warming scare even after temperatures start getting colder. But the funny thing is, the reason the Bush Administration started using the term “Climate Change” was because Frank Luntz advised them to:

“Luntz advises use of the term “climate change” rather than “global warming,” which he says is more frightening.”

http://www.desmogblog.com/bushs-chief-climate-spinmaster-tells-harper-how-its-done

“In a 2002 memo to President George W. Bush titled “The Environment: A Cleaner, Safer, Healthier America”, obtained by the Environmental Working Group, Luntz wrote: “The scientific debate is closing [against us] but not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science…Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field.”

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

Another email from 2004 says: “From the heated debate on global warming to the hot air on forests; from the muddled talk on our nation’s waters to the convolution on air pollution, we are fighting a battle of fact against fiction on the environment – Republicans can’t stress enough that extremists are screaming “Doomsday!” when the environment is actually seeing a new and better day.'”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/apr/04/usnews.theobserver

So, even though Luntz knew the science was “closing” in on them in 2002, he continued to suggest that Republicans act as if the global warming position was “extremist” in 2004. Yet, he seems to have become an “exteremist” himself in 2006:

Luntz: “It’s now 2006. I think most people would conclude that there is global warming taking place and that the behavior of humans are (sic) affecting the climate.”

BBC: “But the administration has continued taking your advice. They’re still questioning the science.”

Luntz: “That’s up to the administration. I’m not the administration. What they want to do is their business. It has nothing to do with what I write. It has nothing to do with what I believe.”

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/06/frank_luntz_acc.php

“Although Luntz later tried to distance himself from the Bush administration policy, it was his idea to discredit the idea of global warming science to keep the issue from influencing voters in the 2000 and 2004 U.S. presidential elections. Luntz has since said that he is not responsible for what the administration has done since that time. Though he now believes humans have contributed to global warming, he maintains that the science was in fact incomplete, and his recommendation sound, at the time he made it.[5]”

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