[shkkmo]

While the name was not coined as a form of greenwashing, the industry has a long history of greenwashing and outright lies. It is naive to think this industry hasn't considered what label to use for this product and how that affects public perception. It absolutely effects their efforts to dismiss for accurate alternative labels.

Not exactly hard to find, but here you go. https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/should-it...

Do you have proof that this association or this type of association is correlated with education?

[ivan_gammel]

>It is naive to think this industry hasn't considered what label to use for this product

It is not a label, it is scientifically established and accurate name that nobody except some woke and poorly educated Americans wants to change.

The associations of the name with other terms are not correlated with education, they are caused by it, ergo the only proof needed is logical. If you know what it is, you describe it exactly as it really is — clean when burning if compared to coal, producing even stronger greenhouse effect when directly released to atmosphere.

[shkkmo]

> It is not a label, it is scientifically established and accurate name

Not all all. To someone who only understands the meanings of the individual words, the term is extremely ambigous. "Natural gas" could simply mean "air" or could refer to any gas that is naturally occuring in our atmosphere.

The reason why "natural gas" has the meaning that it does is purely convention and has no scientific basis or justification.

> The associations of the name with other terms are not correlated with education, they are caused by it

Education is not how we learn language. We learn language primarily contextually based on experience. While learning additional languages can be assisted by education, contextual experiencea are required for mastery.

> ergo the only proof needed is logical.

That's not how logic works...at all

> nobody except some woke and poorly educated Americans wants to change.

Scientists at Yale are "poorly educated"...? Throwing that accusation out pair with the word 'woke' exposes you as a partisan who has no intrest in learning or constructive discussion

That's not how logic works. Go learn about how logic and science are used together.

[ivan_gammel]

> someone who only understands the meanings of the individual words…

This person probably has a communication disability if they are not able to use language properly. We are not speaking in individual words, we use sentences and grammar, metaphors and homonyms, we have a lot of context even in low-context cultures. All of this can be learned and this is what education is for.

> Scientists at Yale are "poorly educated"...?

Maybe. Ivy League university or scientific degree is not a seal of quality. When you design such research only to control for political affiliation, that’s a bad science.