> Even re-production and communication should be discussed.
I think the most interesting and valuable/useful perspective to discuss this topic from (aside from "the science") is from a human psychology (which is heavily dependent on communication) perspective. Ultimately, actually doing something about climate change (regardless of what the consensus decision of that is) requires political support, and from what we've seen on that front, that seems to be the weakest link within the entire multidimensional problem.
Speaking of human psychology (and communication, and perception of reality), note how quickly moderators were able to memory hole this post - it was on my front page 10 minutes ago, and now it can no longer be found within the first 17 pages of HN. I've seen this phenomenon occur on several occasions over the years, and I don't even check HN all that often, and in each case (of the ones I've noticed) it tends to be particularly controversial topics like this one, where the perspective of the article is "controversial".