That seems to be the general rule. :)

I honestly think it's a natural occurrence. The planet has gone through extreme changes since the beginning, and will continue to do so. Not sure if we have helped it along or not, I'm still kinda on the fence about that one. :) There is no concrete proof if we have escalated it or if it is just doing what it's going to do.

I think by reading the reports there is no doubt we have escalated it. The other times the Earth was going through extreme climate changes was also by external triggers. I believe denial is a pleasant way to stay unconcerned and making ourselves an alibi not to think more about it. It's no hoax.

I believe it's happening, there is no denying that. I just wonder how much we contributed to it. We have had quite an increase in volcanic eruptions in the last few decades and I think that could have helped it along as well. Maybe it's just a big cauldron mix of everything. I'm pretty sure we have our fingerprints on it though, just to what extent?    

How is asking which term you prefer nonsense? I haven't denied or proclaimed anything in my question. 

Your question includes the word, 'choose'.  This implies similarity, or that a comparison can be made between the two terms.  This is not the case, since while they are associated terms, they are still fundamentally different things.

In order to avoid the kind of nonsense propagated by Jim inhofe, we need to accept the fact they are different and distinguish between the two.  This in turn means not treating them as the same things, or trying to construct a fallacious argument (see the previously mentioned Senator), the only purpose of which is to slow the acceptance of reality and make as much money as possible in the meantime.

The word 'choose' is nowhere in my question. "

Which phrase do you prefer....

global warming or climate change? Is there a difference?"

I've heard some people use both terms and I've heard people argue over which is correct. 

The word 'prefer' is defined as making a choice.  Therefore the question invites a choice between two phrases, implying that they are fundamentally similar.  They are not.

The question is asking which phrase you prescribe to. If you read my comments on here, you can see I know the difference, I'm just asking which one you guys prefer to use. Some think it's global warming (caused by man), some think it's climate change (a natural progression). Nowhere did I imply the two phrases are the same. The only similarity is in the fact that things are changing whether man had a hand in it or not.  

That sounds about right. People argue over which term is appropriate and I just find that a bit silly.  

The point I was trying to make is that the global warming media proponents changed the name of global warming to climate change. This is their MO:  If we can't make you believe in Bill because you believe in Jack, we'll just call Bill Jack and the idiot masses will never know the difference. 

Right. I see what you are saying now. They do have a tendency to change the narrative. 

Some find the two terms interchangeable, some argue over which is correct. I think they should come together and find the true facts about what is or is not going on.

I personally don't find them to be interchangeable and, as with many other things, there are those who believe global warming and climate change to be a hoax and others who don't.  If the polar ice caps are melting and the earth's temperature has been warming even by a degree or two, it would seem that global warming is not in dispute.  The dispute is whether it is being caused by humans.

People argue over the slightest little things. People can find a thousand ways to claim their arguments. 

Thank you. That was pretty interesting.