That’s a good name for it.

And to your other point, it must be emphasized that oil and coal companies knew about it 40+ years ago, and chose to fund opposition research and disinformation instead.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_co... Exxon knew since the 1970s

http://www.climatefiles.com/coal/mining-congress-journal-aug... Choice quote from this article in a 1966 coal journal:

> If the future rate of increase continues as it is at the present, it has been predicted that, because the CO2 envelope reduces radiation, the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere will increase and that vast changes in the climates of the earth will result. Such changes in temperature will cause melting of the polar icecaps, which, in turn, would result in the inundation of many coastal cities, including New York and London.

I like Climate Catastrophe, because that's what we are in.

Frank Luntz brags (exaggerates) about changing the vernacular to benefit the GOP/deniers - we should do the same to scare people into accepting and understanding the current reality.

Catastrophizing doesn't work. It fuels extremism at worst and at best breeds distrust in experts. Covid19 has been a fantastic study on how not to handle global catastrophes.

Just because we can't handle the catastrophe doesn't mean we are not in one (multiple)

Sure. But getting everyday people to panic will actively hurt efforts to deal with these problems. People get really stupid, shortsighted, violent, and desperate when they feel like the world they know and benefit from is slipping away from them.