@DikranMarsupial there are two main issues to take into account: 1) Climate change has a lot of anti-science going on. Dispelling those claims is certainly in our territory much more than earthscience, where they should be mostly debating the science, not the wierd beliefs of people. 2) Our standard of evidence is higher than other science sites exactly to offset the lack of experts: if an expert answers a question, how do we know (here) that they are right?

However, on a science site, speculation is fine because experts will vet it.

So, people asking questions will quite often receive different answers here than on science sites.

For example, I'm sure there's a bunch of stuff that we strongly suspect, in climate science, but we haven't proven yet. On this site, we only accept as valid what's been proven already, we are conservative in that respect.

That's fine because we don't care about the Truth(TM), which is ever out of reach, but we only care about what has been proven so far.

Sciences, on the other hand, care about advancing knowledge, so they must speculate.