Both terms have been in use for at least 50 years. It is a complex topic so no matter which two word moniker you coin to represent it, you can always poke a hol

Both terms have been in use for at least 50 years. It is a complex topic so no matter which two word moniker you coin to represent it, you can always poke a hole in it. The people who think "climate change" is a fig leaf to cover up the fact that the globe didn't warm monotonically are simply ignorant. The models have always shown that some places will get drier, some will get wetter, some places cooler. One of the things deniers always cherry pick is when some study mentions higher snowfall or rainfall in some particular region of the world. Odd that they believe the scientist when when they thing the datum supports their claim, but then will dismiss the same person who wrote the paper they cited as being in the pocket of George Soros or someone when the researcher doesn't support their preferred conclusion.