This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
food politics writers
slub
Aug 25, 2014 21:02
9 yrs ago
2 viewers *
English term

global warming-denying conservatives

English to German Science Journalism
Are anti-GMO activists just like ***global warming-denying conservatives***?

It's unjustifiable for defenders of science to lump together ***global warming-denying conservatives*** and anti-GMO activists as disturbingly anti-science, writes biologist Kamil Ahsan in an interesting article (http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15579).


Wie würdet ihr das formulieren? Zumindest für die Überschrift suche ich nach einem möglichst kurzen und prägnanten Begriff.
Proposed translations (German)
3 +9 (Politisch) konservative Klimaskeptiker
4 +1 konservative Leugner der globalen Erwärmung
3 konservative Klimawandelverneiner
3 konservative globale-Erwärmungsleugner
3 Anti-GVO-Aktivisten auf einer Stufe mit Anti-Klima-Lobby?

Discussion

Björn Vrooman Aug 31, 2014:
Pt. 3 (as with part 2, also @Olaf) And:
"Einer der Klimahardliner, der republikanische Senator James Inhofe aus Oklahoma sagte: 'Versuchte man eine menschgemachte globale Erwärmung zu beweisen, indem man die wohlbekannte Tatsache, dass es heute wärmer ist als zum Ende der kleinen Eiszeit, ist das genau so, als würde man Sommer mit Winter vergleichen um einen katastrophalen Temperaturtrend zu belegen.'"

That is exactly what I had the discussion about with Irene: As soon as you omit the "anthropogen" in "anthropogener Treibhauseffekt", you're playing right into their (the conservatives') hands. They don't deny that the climate is changing (!), they simply deny that man can influence it.
Björn Vrooman Aug 31, 2014:
Pt. 2 Even though "Globalerwärmung" may be in use, all three words combined are not (at least no more than a handful of references worldwide and most of them not according to grammar rules).

Your Klimadissident (no hypen necessary here, IMO) is actually the other way around. It's someone who is not denying climate change in contrast to the rest of his colleagues (as far as I've read the Spiegel article, the guy was supportive of the scientists' findings) - it's the same word as in English. The term you were looking for in the Spiegel article was "Klimahardliner" - that was the one for the die-hard deniers of global warming.

What I thought was very interesting was another part in the article you posted:
"'[in den USA] haben Skeptiker des Klimawandels direkten Kontakt zu einflussreichen Mitgliedern des Senats und des Repräsentantenhauses.' Auch die mediale Darstellung sei anders als in Europa. 'Da wird gerne der Eindruck erweckt, als gäbe es in der Klimaforschung zwei gleich starke Seiten - und die werden dann auch beide ausgewogen angehört.'"

One more point why you should not equate American conservatives with German ones.
Björn Vrooman Aug 31, 2014:
@Yorkshireman As ibz was so kind enough not to indulge you here (guess I'm working up my way to "sarcasm heaven"), I'll do the explaining.

The link below will let you read up on almost anything hyphen-related (if you are OK with their "mean-spiritedness", kind of).
http://www.belleslettres.eu/artikel/schreibung-durchgekoppel...

The alternatives:
http://www.duden.de/sprachwissen/rechtschreibregeln/bindestr...
http://www.korrekturen.de/sprachleben/rechtschreibung/der_ho...

Now, in your example, it's first about the "globale Erwärmung". Because we're not talking about an entire phrase (as in "das In-den-Tag-hinein-Leben"), it marks a normal compound (noun), which should read Globalerwärmung. Not "globale" because it's the first part of the compound, so it should be a non-inflected adjective ("global").

The next step is the so-called "Fugen-s":
http://www.abzv.de/Newsletter/Download-Services/Fugen-s.pdf

Some people may be strongly opposed to a hyphen after a Fugen-s if it's not really necessary. I guess that depends :)

So, you could write: Globalerwärmungsleugner. Or: Globalerwärmungs-Leugner.

Best wishes
Björn Vrooman Aug 27, 2014:
@Olaf You wrote: "In der Überschrift könnte man das "konservative" eventuell weglassen, weil es ja im Fließtext darunter nochmal vorkommt."

That was one of the two points I was trying to make with my own answer that mainly focused on the headline: "konservativ" not necessary because repeated soon afterward and will only make headline longer.

Otherwise, I didn't see any reason not to agree with Irene on what she suggested, except for the last part. I still think the German "Konservative" is too broad because of the different party systems, but that's, of course, entirely up to you.

Considering your three options:

I'd go for the last one. "das Gleiche [I believe G should be capitalized] in Grün" makes me think of two other things first: vegetarians and the (old) police uniforms. Since conservatives denying global warming have little to do with any "green" (eco-friendly attitude) I actually think that may not work at all.

"in einen Topf" could be a witty statement for some cooking-related theme.

"Schublade" = Schubladendenken would probably best match the text from the link you provided (comparing three different groups by accusing them of the same anti-science attitude).
Olaf Reibedanz (asker) Aug 27, 2014:
Danke euch allen! Ich hab mich für Irenes Lösung entschieden ("konservative Klimaskeptiker"). Allerdings bin ich noch am Überlegen, wie ich die Überschrift löse. Wie findet ihr:

a) Anti-Gentech-Aktivisten und ((konservative)) Klimaskeptiker: das gleiche in Grün?
b) Gehören Gentech-Gegner und ((konservative)) Klimaskeptiker in einen Topf?
c) Gehören Gentech-Gegner und ((konservative)) Klimaskeptiker in eine Schublade?

(In der Überschrift könnte man das "konservative" eventuell weglassen, weil es ja im Fließtext darunter nochmal vorkommt.
Björn Vrooman Aug 26, 2014:
@Irene I've already posted an answer before you replied.

Let me first say that my comment to you included: "Still: You're the only one using 'konservativ' correctly (if needed)." So, it's far from an entirely negative statement.

Condescending it is not: I am perplexed. You're telling me you're not much worried about journalists (and I assume that includes what they're writing) but you post an answer to a question about how to phrase a headline in a news piece? That is rather interesting because I simply don't get it.

Maybe I just don't understand what you were really trying to say.

In addition, one of your last discussion entries included "Also, I start to feel that this discussion may not serve the primary purpose of helping Olaf." To me, that sounded like a rather sharp cut-off. I merely explained why I think you should add something to the Treibhauseffekt and you replied to that with a different opinion and that's fine (in fact, it's the reason for having a discussion board).

I'll get out the last comment statement, so as to not confuse anyone.

PS: It may be an assumption (Germans not knowing) but it's based on experience. The other way around is also a big assumption. Depends.
Irene Schlotter, Dipl.-Übers. Aug 26, 2014:
@Björn [last comment] Your last comment to my suggestion was among others „Not much worried about journalists but sentence is used in a news story? Interesting.“. Am I mistaken or are you being rather condescending?
Also, you say that „Germans are generally not that aware of US politics [ff.]“ - now that's quite an assumption, too, which does not seem to marry too well with your preoccupation of journalistic accuracy.
Why - if you know better - don't you simply post an answer that covers any issues previously brought up for discussion? I for my part fail to see any benefit in the continuation of this rather one-sided 'interchange'.
Björn Vrooman Aug 26, 2014:
@Yorkshireman When it comes to the second part, I agree: Republikaner would be the better term if you must include the word.
Björn Vrooman Aug 26, 2014:
@Irene I simply responded to your comment: "Treibhauseffekt“ [...] is primarily associated with the man-made effects of the shrinking of the ozone layer".

Of course, methane can both deplete the ozon layer and contribute to global warming. That does not mean that global warming is now mainly associated with ozone depletion. These are two different, though possibly related, phenomena.

On a side note: As soon as you start to no longer delimit the term (divding it into anthropogen and natürlich), you will simply have supported the argument that people sceptical of climate change make here: The planet is changing anyway, so why should we care?
Yorkshireman Aug 26, 2014:
Dissidenten Klima-Dissidenten im Lager der Republikaner.
Irene Schlotter, Dipl.-Übers. Aug 26, 2014:
@Björn Methane is one of the gases directly related to both the ozone layer thickness and the greenhouse effect. The release of huge subterranean quantities of fossile methane (as has happened in Siberia, creating a hole of 80 m in diameter) would have negative effects on both. Now the realease of subterranean methane may indeed be a natural process - but not within such a short period of time as was detected. My point: In my point of view the discussion about what is natural and what is not is rather useless as the boundaries tend to blend. Also, I start to feel that this discussion may not serve the primary purpose of helping Olaf.
Björn Vrooman Aug 26, 2014:
@Olaf I'd really like to know from you whether the word "conservative" could be omitted without any problems here.

The author is apparently drawing a comparison by using the special group of US conservatives which tries to take advantage of every shred of paper that could possibly denounce global-warming theories - or they will simply ignore them.

Our so-called konservatives Lager is not as clear-cut - some may only refer to the CDU (and now to the AfD) here, others may include the FDP. And whether they believe in it or not is another matter.

http://www.klimaretter.info/politik/hintergrund/11149-die-kl...

Because Germans are generally not that aware of US politics, I don't know whether any German equivalent may not just confuse more than it does clarify things.

Otherwise, "Klimaleugner/-skeptiker in der Politik" may actually work here.
Björn Vrooman Aug 26, 2014:
@Irene You are mixing up two distinctly different phenomena.

1) The "Ozonloch" was caused by CFCs (in German: FCKWs) and was related to UV radiation. Great explanation of the chemical break-down:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/triple_ocr...

This issue is no longer as important as it used to be. Even Greenpeace isn't warning of any ozone-related risks anymore (I should know as I attended the relevant seminar back in university).

Article about it:
http://www.focus.de/wissen/experten/ernst_peter_fischer_/dgs...

2) Greenhouse gases: Responsible for the planet getting warmer in basically the same way a greenhouse has thicker insulated windows.

http://www.wwf.de/themen-projekte/klima-energie/klimawandel/...
http://www.cms.fu-berlin.de/geo/fb/e-learning/pg-net/themenb...

The correct term is "anthropogener Treibhauseffekt" (see also WWF page above) in contrast to "natürlicher Treibhauseffekt". Leaving out a word would be inaccurate and is generally not recommended.
Björn Vrooman Aug 26, 2014:
@all (also @Olaf) You can't just make an adjective out of a noun here! What is the opposite then? "liberale Klimaleugner/skeptiker"?

The correct German terminology is "aus dem konservativen Lager/unter den Konservativen". Only Irene seemed to have thought along the same lines.

You can say konservatives Blatt, konservativer Nachrichtensender - but not konservative Leugner.

I don't even know whether I would get in the "konservativ". Being a Republican or Liberal in the US is distinctly different from what we have here. The deniers of global warming can be almost exclusively found on the right side of the political spectrum in the US, although it will be hard to equate them with "rechts" - the party structure in the US is simply different, with basically only two parties. And: not all conservatives are "deniers".

The whole sentence would be something like:

Anti-GVO genauso verfehlt wie Anti-Klimawandel?

By the way @Irene: Having covered the renewable business for years and having watched enough American TV, I should note that "Skeptiker" is too weak of a word for me. They are more like the creationist movement in the US: all staunch and die-hard defenders of their theories.
Wendy Streitparth Aug 26, 2014:
@ Horst: Vielleicht ist anti- (GMO) activist eh gemeint.
Horst Huber (X) Aug 26, 2014:
Rechtsgerichtete Leugner des Klimawandels should not be associated with GMO opponents who might be on the left?
Irene Schlotter, Dipl.-Übers. Aug 25, 2014:
Klimaskeptiker ist so ein Schlagwort ... oder Klimawandelskeptiker/Treihauseffektskeptiker (dann vielleicht mit Bindestrich)...

Proposed translations

+9
5 mins
Selected

(Politisch) konservative Klimaskeptiker

Ich würde es umdrehen.
Vielleicht auch: Klimaskeptiker aus dem Lager der Konservativen

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 6 Min. (2014-08-25 21:09:01 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Im Fließtext: : Skeptiker. die den Treibhauseffekt an-/bezweifeln ...
Peer comment(s):
agree Danik 2014
2 hrs
Danke, Danik2014
agree Horst Huber (X) : Sollten sie eher (Klimawandel-)Leugner heißen?
4 hrs
Danke, Horst. Ich glaube, mittlerweile hat sich „...skeptiker“ eingebürgert. Ich kann mich aber auch irren.
agree Steffen Walter
9 hrs
Danke, Steffen.
agree Susanne Schiewe
10 hrs
Danke, Susanne.
agree Gudrun Wolfrath : http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wissen/klima/klimaskeptiker-die-l...
10 hrs
Danke, Gudrun.
agree ibz
11 hrs
Danke, ibz.
agree mill2
12 hrs
Danke, mill2.
neutral Björn Vrooman : It's "anthropogener Treibhauseffekt". Journalists are already under fire for not being accurate. Still: You're the only one using "konservativ" correctly (if needed).
13 hrs
In German, the term „Treibhauseffekt“ - though describing a perfectly normal phenomenon - is primarily associated with the man-made effects of the shrinking of the ozone layer. |Actually, I am not much worried about journalists.
agree Ramey Rieger (X)
15 hrs
Thanks, Ramey.
agree Harald Moelzer (medical-translator)
1 day 7 hrs
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Danke euch allen! Ich hab mich letztlich für Irenes Lösung entschieden: Gehören Gentech-Gegner und Klimaskeptiker in eine Schublade? In einem interessanten Artikel schreibt der Biologe Kamil Ahsan, es sei unverantwortlich, wenn angebliche Verfechter der Wissenschaft konservative Klimaskeptiker (die den Einfluss des Menschen auf die Erderwärmung ableugnen) und Gentech-Gegner in einen Topf werfen und gleichermaßen als „unwissenschaftlich“ abtun. "
1 hr

konservative Klimawandelverneiner

Hier ein Beispiel dazu (auch ein Antonym, "Klimawandelanhänger"):
http://11k2.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/der-arktische-oszillato...
In unseren Breiten ist es gar nicht so ungewöhnlich, im Winter Schnee und Temperaturen unter dem Gefrierpunkt zu haben. Aber trotzdem sind sich Laien und Fachleute einig, dass es unüblich kalt ist. Die überzeugten Klimawandelverneiner sehen die aktuelle Saison natürlich als “Beweis” dafür an, dass man auch weiterhin beliebig viele Abgase in die Atmosphäre feuern darf. Und die Klimawandelanhänger sind leicht verwirrt.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2014-08-25 22:08:41 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Und noch hier:
http://magazin.cultura21.de/kultur/wissen/der-klimawandel-un...
Viele der kürzlichen Angriffe von Klimawandelverneinern auf die Klimawissenschaft – und noch beunruhigender: auf ihre Personen – sind üblicherweise durch Interessengruppen oder Dogmen getrieben, nicht durch einen ehrlichen Versuch, eine alternative Theorie zu entwickeln, die die Beobachtungen befriedigend erklären kann.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Cuccinelli
In dem Brief wurde auch Bestürzung geäußert über die Art und Weise, wie „Klimawandelverneiner“ nicht nur die Klimaforschung im Allgemeinen, sondern auch einzelne Klimaforscher angreifen würden. Derartige Angriffe würden nicht von einem aufrichtigen Streben nach alternativen Erklärungen geleitet, sondern von „Interessengruppen oder Dogmen.“
Something went wrong...
+1
11 hrs

konservative Leugner der globalen Erwärmung

...klingt besser, finde ich...
Peer comment(s):
neutral Yorkshireman : Nice of you to say so
30 mins
agree Harald Moelzer (medical-translator) : auch eine gute Lösung
6 days
neutral Björn Vrooman : Disagree with Harald. A) too long B) means: "politisch dem Konservatismus zugehörende Leugner der globalen Erwärmung" - because you can't just say "konservativ" as in "werterhaltend". Probably why people refrain from using the word in this combination.
7 days
Something went wrong...
10 hrs

konservative globale-Erwärmungsleugner

This gets the global warming across

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 16 hrs (2014-08-26 13:13:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Klima-Dissidenten im Lager der Republikaner.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 16 hrs (2014-08-26 13:18:59 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Zitat: Ob das 155-seitige Dokument, das Boehlert von dem Wissenschaftler-Gremium überreicht wurde, den allgemeinverbindlichen Kenntnisstand bei Washingtons Politikern nun anhebt, ist zumindest fraglich. Nicht nur geht Boehlert, der Klima-Dissident im Lager der Republikaner, am Ende des Jahres in den Ruhestand.

Quelle: http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/klimadebatte-global...
Peer comment(s):
neutral ibz : Das ist leider kein korrektes Deutsch. // Nein, die Kupplungen sind falsch. Tilmanns Lösung wäre korrekt.
2 hrs
globale-Erwärmungs-Leugner - OK? Which, IMO, actually should have been posted as a neutral to my answer rather than separately.
neutral Björn Vrooman : Did you see my latest discussion entries (put some effort into them)? Agree with you about not posting separate answers - but also because Tilmann's solution is not correct, IMO. Won't disagree but Dissident means the opposite of what you were looking for
7 days
Something went wrong...
22 hrs

Anti-GVO-Aktivisten auf einer Stufe mit Anti-Klima-Lobby?

I am just offering you an alternative because you wanted to have it short and it's a news piece. You do not want to make your headline look like an essay in political science. In addition, it's drawing the comparison by including "Anti" at both ends but for different reasons.

Furthermore:

Comparing US conservatives with German ones is kind of like comparing apples and oranges. Excerpt from the link that Olaf provided:
"Ever since its coining by conservatives, 'scientism' has been used pejoratively, most commonly by the same people who deny evolution and climate change. Consequently, leftists have historically renounced the word, signaling that that they fall on the side of scientific truth and not religion or spirituality."
http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15579)

And something like that you want to attribute to the CDU, FDP, or others in the "bürgerlich-konservativen Lager"? Nice one!

See "Anti-Klima-Lobby" or "Anti-Klimawandel" in action:
http://scienceblogs.de/frischer-wind/2008/11/17/trailer-des-...
http://www.welt.de/wissenschaft/umwelt/article10985058/Die-E...
http://cafe-europe.info/news-detail/hintergrund/news/austral...
http://www.utopia.de/magazin/den-tank-voller-klimaluegen-eik...

Anti-GVO-Aktivisten:
http://konsumrevolution.org/?cat=4
http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/deutschland/jon-rap...

All links that should appeal to your target readership.

And before someone still objects to my non-inclusion of conservatives: A headline needs to get across the main point you're trying to make. You can elaborate on it later (and include "Klimaleugner/-skeptiker aus dem Lager der Republikaner" [yes, don't use conservatives - nod to Yorkshireman here]).

Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search