Yes. It is important to communicate to the public though, that our "we have no idea" is a very definite and informed understanding of the world, while deniers' supposed certainty on it not existing isn't based on anything. 

At the same time scientists need to not let the news media call every warm spell or hurricane a surefire sign of climate change.

Science in general is really poorly communicated right now. When I look at actual paper behind such articles as "Tea prevents cancer" I find it's a tiny effect from thousands of automated tests on a dataset the scientists didn't even collect themselves, and they didn't make a single claim about the mechanism that tea might do so, or even if the effect would show up again if re-tested. Yet it spawned some big and certain-sounding headlines. The really sad part is that the general public can't even check, because the original (despite being publicly funded) is behind a journal paywall.

I agree with all that 100%.  The Journal's thing being the biggest thing.

Scientific Journals are really pretty good reads too... it'd suck if i ever lost access to them.

it's great to, because once you learn how to read a scietnific article you can read anything from brain surgery, to physics, to psychology, and it's all pretty easy to understand.

That works both ways my friend

OP: Anyways hope that pipeline would decrease the price of gas, but its probably wont do much. 

I never supported Biofuels, they are such a waste of time. Why grow fuel, when something like 2 billion people are mal-nourished? 

As i said before, Solar isn't great but what technology is decent at first? The sun's heat is a huge energy source and yet we are not even using it. It's crazy. But the problem is, that it will be all we have one day as fossil fuels run out. We can already see the signs of it, as people are more willing to take risks when it comes to drilling oil which are also far more polluting than before. Just look at tar sands in Alberta and the possibility of drilling in the Arctic. 

Stuff like wind and geothermal are also good. There must be a way of getting energy from all the hurricanes and tornadoes that the US gets. Also, for geothermal. The US has Yellowstone park which could create a lot of energy in some way. Iceland manages to create alot of energy from geothermal. 

Nuclear is ok but they need to sort out ways of dealing with all that waste. But it is good enough until renewable solutions can make a good amount of our energy.

Our main problem is how do we meet our energy demands but not damage the environment too much but also keep things sustainable? It is our biggest challenge so far. Also, i don't think we should rely on what type of energy too much, it must be as diverse as possible