Of course, the idea was to discuss U.S. policy, not the validy of climate change itself. One pro speaker envisioned outsourcing our pollution to China. I dig that, I'm down with that. And the next con speaker emphasized the "drastic" portion of the resolved.
But I feel differently, I say "combat" is the keyword. Why? Well, I don't mind some kind of combating climate change - LA did that in the 70s and 80s to the extent that by the time I was born, there was no red haze downtown for me to stare at regularly. But I wouldn't go so far as climate change in the classroom, in the thermostat, and in the tax law.