Of this article's seven experiments, the first five demonstrate that virtually no Americans know the basic global warming mechanism. Fortunately, Experiments 2-5 found that 2-45 min of physicalchemical climate instruction durably increased such understandings. This mechanistic learning, or merely receiving seven highly germane statistical facts (Experiment 6), also increased climate-change acceptance-across the liberal-conservative spectrum. However, Experiment 7's misleading statistics decreased such acceptance (and dramatically, knowledge-confidence). These readily available attitudinal and conceptual changes through scientific information disconfirm what we term "stasis theory"-which some researchers and many laypeople varyingly maintain. Stasis theory subsumes the claim that informing people (particularly Americans) about climate science may be largely futile or even counterproductive-a view that appears historically na€ ıve, suffers from range restrictions (e.g., near-zero mechanistic knowledge), and/or misinterprets some polarization and (noncausal) correlational data. Our studies evidenced no polarizations. Finally, we introduce HowGlobalWarmingWorks.org-a website designed to directly enhance public "climate-change cognition." This article contains information that appears here alone, but Experiments 1-7 are described elsewhere, often with more available descriptive space. Therefore, for additional (usually more) explicit information about motivations, methods, and findings, please note that Experiment 1 appears in Ranney et al. (2012a, Study 1) and in considerable detail in Cohen (2012); Experiment 2 appears in Ranney et al. (2012a, Study 2) and also in Clark (2013, Study 6.1); Experiments 3, 5, and 7 appear in Clark et al. (2013, Studies 1, 4, and 2, respectively); Experiments 3 and 7 also appear with considerable detail in Clark (2013, Studies 6.2 and 4.2); Experiment 5 also appears with considerable detail in Felipe (2012); Experiments 4 and 6 appear with considerable detail in Clark (2013, Studies 6.3 and 5.2). Given present allotted space, we have generally compacted the studies here, but we have more richly explicated a minority of the studies.