In class, we were asked to define climate change. But, asking someone to define climate change is setting them up to fail. And that is because there is no one correct answer. Like many controversial topics, the environment is not concrete and what we know and predict holds some level of uncertainty. Any attempt to generalize in the defining process is a slap in the face to someone, something, or somewhere. So we ask what the climate has changed and retrieve an endless list. But first we must consider those that refute the base lying fact that our environment is changing. We call these people climate deniers because they will tell you that it is all a hoax or a societal construct for dealing with inequality. So how do we as a society expect to define a term that some cannot accept. Without accepting this basic phenomenon, we cannot recognize the causes of change. And furthermore, the alterations and impacts of those very changes. The seal will tell you that it is losing its glaciers and the person with seasonal allergies will complain about increased allergens. The fisherman will tell you he has nothing to sell and those just displaced from their home will tell you it’s because of the hurricane. But none of these can be isolated because the same rising atmospheric temperatures melting the seal’s arctic habitat is also the source for the longer growing and pollenating season causing asthma attacks. And the warmer oceans and oxygen depletion killing fish is also causing thermal expansion so ocean levels rise and move further inland, increasing the impacts of natural disasters. So here we have two issues at hand: 1-we cannot collectively agree that the planet is changing and 2-trying to define climate change in one way ignores all the multifaceted implications.