The majority of climate scientists agree that global warming is primarily caused by human activities such as fossil fuel burning and deforestation. Environmental organizations, many governmental reports, and the non-U.S. media agree on this virtually unanimous scientific community agreement substantiating human-caused global warming, although there is less agreement on the specific consequences of this warming. Opponents either maintain that most scientists consider global warming "unproved," dismiss it altogether, or highlight the dangers of focusing on only one viewpoint in the context of unsettled science. [1] [2] [3]
National and international
science academies and
scientific societies have assessed the current
scientific opinion, in particular on recent
global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 that states:
An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. [4]
As of 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion. A few organisations hold non-committal positions.
Synthesis reports are assessments of scientific literature that compile the results of a range of stand-alone studies in order to achieve a broad level of understanding, or to describe the state of knowledge of a given subject. [5]
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007 | |
---|---|
In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming Fourth Assessment Report. According to this summary, the Fourth Assessment Report finds that human actions are "very likely" the cause of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability. Global warming in this case is indicated by an increase of 0.75 degrees in average global temperatures over the last 100 years. [6] The New York Times reported:
The Associated Press summarized the position on sea level rise:
|
U.S. Global Change Research Program | |
---|---|
formerly the
Climate Change Science Program
The U.S. Global Change Research Program reported in June, 2009 [10] that:
The report, which is about the effects that climate change is having in the United States, also says:
|
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment | |
---|---|
In 2004, the intergovernmental
Arctic Council and the non-governmental
International Arctic Science Committee released the synthesis report of the
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment
[11]:
|
European Academy of Sciences and Arts | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
European Academy of Sciences and Arts issued a formal declaration on climate change titled Let's Be Honest:
|
InterAcademy Council | |
---|---|
As the representative of the world’s
scientific and engineering academies,
[14]
[15] the
InterAcademy Council (IAC) issued a report in 2007 titled Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future.
|
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences (CAETS) issued a Statement on Environment and Sustainable Growth
[18]:
|
Joint science academies' statements | |
---|---|
Since 2001, 32
national science academies have come together to issue joint declarations confirming anthropogenic global warming, and urging the nations of the world to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The signatories of these statements have been the national science academies of
Australia,
Belgium,
Brazil,
Cameroon,
Canada, the
Caribbean,
China,
France,
Ghana,
Germany,
Indonesia,
Ireland,
Italy,
India,
Japan,
Kenya,
Madagascar,
Malaysia,
Mexico,
Nigeria,
New Zealand,
Russia,
Senegal,
South Africa,
Sudan,
Sweden,
Tanzania, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
|
Network of African Science Academies | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
Network of African Science Academies submitted a joint “statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change” to the leaders meeting at the G8 Summit in Heiligendamm, Germany:
The thirteen signatories were the science academies of Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, as well as the African Academy of Sciences. |
Royal Society of New Zealand | |
---|---|
Having signed onto the first joint science academies' statement in 2001, the
Royal Society of New Zealand released a separate statement in 2008 in order to clear up "the controversy over climate change and its causes, and possible confusion among the public":
|
Polish Academy of Sciences | |
---|---|
In December 2007, the General Assembly of the
Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) issued a statement endorsing the IPCC conclusions, and states:
|
National Research Council (US) | |
---|---|
In 2001, the Committee on the Science of Climate Change of the
National Research Council published Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions.
[27] This report explicitly endorses the IPCC view of attribution of recent climate change as representing the view of the scientific community:
|
Australian Institute of Physics | |
---|---|
In 2005, the Australian Institute of Physics (AIP) issued a science policy document in which they stated:
|
American Association for the Advancement of Science | |
---|---|
As the world's largest general scientific society, the
American Association for the Advancement of Science adopted an official statement on climate change in 2006:
|
American Chemical Society | |
---|---|
The
American Chemical Society stated:
|
American Institute of Physics | |
---|---|
The Governing Board of the
American Institute of Physics endorsed the AGU statement on human-induced climate change:
[31]
|
American Physical Society | |
---|---|
In November 2007, the
American Physical Society (APS) adopted an official statement on climate change:
|
European Science Foundation | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
European Science Foundation issued a Position Paper on climate change:
|
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS) issued a policy statement on climate change:
|
American Geophysical Union | |
---|---|
The
American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement,
[35] adopted by the society in 2003 and revised in 2007, affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:
|
European Federation of Geologists | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
European Federation of Geologists (EFG) issued the position paper Carbon Capture and geological Storage :
|
European Geosciences Union | |
---|---|
In 2005, the Divisions of Atmospheric and Climate Sciences of the
European Geosciences Union (EGU) issued a position statement in support of the
joint science academies’ statement on global response to climate change. The statement refers to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as "the main representative of the global
scientific community", and asserts that the IPCC
Additionally, in 2008, the EGU issued a position statement on ocean acidification which states, "Ocean acidification is already occurring today and will continue to intensify, closely tracking atmospheric CO2 increase. Given the potential threat to marine ecosystems and its ensuing impact on human society and economy, especially as it acts in conjunction with anthropogenic global warming, there is an urgent need for immediate action." The statement then advocates for strategies "to limit future release of CO2 to the atmosphere and/or enhance removal of excess CO2 from the atmosphere." [38] |
Geological Society of America | |
---|---|
In 2006, the
Geological Society of America adopted a position statement on global climate change:
|
Geological Society of Australia | |
---|---|
In July 2009, the
Geological Society of Australia issued the position statement Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change:
|
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics | |
---|---|
In July 2007, the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG) adopted a resolution titled “The Urgency of Addressing Climate Change”. In it, the IUGG concurs with the “comprehensive and widely accepted and endorsed scientific assessments carried out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and regional and national bodies, which have firmly established, on the basis of scientific evidence, that human activities are the primary cause of recent climate change.” They state further that the “continuing reliance on combustion of fossil fuels as the world’s primary source of energy will lead to much higher atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses, which will, in turn, cause significant increases in surface temperature, sea level, ocean acidification, and their related consequences to the environment and society.” [41] |
National Association of Geoscience Teachers | |
---|---|
In July 2009, the
National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT) adopted a position statement on climate change in which they assert that "Earth's climate is changing [and] "that present warming trends are largely the result of human activities":
|
American Meteorological Society | |
---|---|
The
American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2003 said:
|
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society | |
---|---|
The
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society has issued a Statement on Climate Change, wherein they conclude:
|
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences | |
---|---|
In November 2005, the
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS) issued a letter to the
Prime Minister of Canada stating that
|
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society | |
---|---|
|
Royal Meteorological Society (UK) | |
---|---|
In February 2007, after the release of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, the Royal Meteorological Society issued an endorsement of the report. In addition to referring to the IPCC as “world’s best climate scientists”, they stated that climate change is happening as “the result of emissions since industrialization and we have already set in motion the next 50 years of global warming – what we do from now on will determine how worse it will get.” [47] |
World Meteorological Organization | |
---|---|
In its Statement at the Twelfth Session of the Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change presented on November 15, 2006, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirms the need to “prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” The WMO concurs that “scientific assessments have increasingly reaffirmed that human activities are indeed changing the composition of the atmosphere, in particular through the burning of fossil fuels for energy production and transportation.” The WMO concurs that “the present atmospheric concentration of CO2 was never exceeded over the past 420,000 years;” and that the IPCC “assessments provide the most authoritative, up-to-date scientific advice.” |
American Quaternary Association | |
---|---|
The
American Quaternary Association (AMQUA) has stated
|
International Union for Quaternary Research | |
---|---|
The statement on climate change issued by the
International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA) reiterates the conclusions of the IPCC, and urges all nations to take prompt action in line with the
UNFCCC principles.
|
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians | |
---|---|
The
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians (AAWV) has issued a position statement regarding "climate change, wildlife diseases, and wildlife health":
|
American Society for Microbiology | |
---|---|
In 2003, the
American Society for Microbiology issued a public policy report in which they recommend “reducing net anthropogenic CO2 emissions to the atmosphere” and “minimizing anthropogenic disturbances of” atmospheric gases:
[52]
|
Australian Coral Reef Society | |
---|---|
In 2006, the
Australian Coral Reef Society issued an official communique regarding the
Great Barrier Reef and the "world-wide decline in
coral reefs through processes such as
overfishing, runoff of nutrients from the land,
coral bleaching, global climate change,
ocean acidification,
pollution", etc.:
|
Institute of Biology (UK) | |
---|---|
The UK's Institute of Biology states “there is scientific agreement that the rapid global warming that has occurred in recent years is mostly anthropogenic, ie due to human activity.” As a consequence of global warming, they warn that a “rise in sea levels due to melting of ice caps is expected to occur. Rises in temperature will have complex and frequently localised effects on weather, but an overall increase in extreme weather conditions and changes in precipitation patterns are probable, resulting in flooding and drought. The spread of tropical diseases is also expected.” Subsequently, the Institute of Biology advocates policies to reduce “greenhouse gas emissions, as we feel that the consequences of climate change are likely to be severe.” [57] |
Society of American Foresters | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
Society of American Foresters (SAF) issued two position statements pertaining to climate change in which they cite the IPCC and the UNFCCC:
|
The Wildlife Society (international) | |
---|---|
The Wildlife Society has issued a position statement titled Global Climate Change and Wildlife:
[60]
The statement goes on to assert that “evidence is accumulating that wildlife and wildlife habitats have been and will continue to be significantly affected by ongoing large-scale rapid climate change.” The statement concludes with a call for “reduction in anthropogenic (human-caused) sources of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions contributing to global climate change and the conservation of CO2- consuming photosynthesizers (i.e., plants).” |
American Academy of Pediatrics | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
American Academy of Pediatrics issued the policy statement Global Climate Change and Children's Health:
|
American College of Preventive Medicine | |
---|---|
In 2006, the
American College of Preventive Medicine issued a policy statement on “Abrupt Climate Change and Public Health Implications”:
|
American Medical Association | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
American Medical Association issued a policy statement on global climate change declaring that they:
|
American Public Health Association | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
American Public Health Association issued a policy statement titled ‘’Addressing the Urgent Threat of Global Climate Change to Public Health and the Environment’’:
|
Australian Medical Association | |
---|---|
In 2004, the
Australian Medical Association issued the position statement Climate Change and Human Health in which they recommend policies "to mitigate the possible consequential health effects of climate change through improved energy efficiency, clean energy production and other emission reduction steps."
[65]
This statement was revised again in 2008:
|
World Federation of Public Health Associations | |
---|---|
In 2001, the
World Federation of Public Health Associations issued a policy resolution on global climate change:
|
World Health Organization | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
United Nations'
World Health Organization issued their report Protecting health from climate change:
|
American Astronomical Society | |
---|---|
The
American Astronomical Society has endorsed the AGU statement:
[69]
|
American Statistical Association | |
---|---|
On November 30, 2007, the
American Statistical Association Board of Directors adopted a statement on climate change:
|
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia) | |
---|---|
|
International Association for Great Lakes Research | |
---|---|
In February 2009, the
International Association for Great Lakes Research (IAGLR) issued a Fact Sheet on climate change:
|
American Association of Petroleum Geologists | |
---|---|
The
American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) Position Statement on climate change states that
Prior to the adoption of this statement in June 2007, the AAPG was the only major scientific organization that rejected the finding of significant human influence on recent climate, according to a statement by the Council of the American Quaternary Association. [74] Explaining the plan for a revision, AAPG president Lee Billingsly wrote in March 2007 that
|
American Association of State Climatologists | |
---|---|
The Association has no current statement. The previous statement, discussed below, became inoperative in 2008.
[76]
The 2001 statement from the American Association of State Climatologists noted the difficulties with predicting impacts due to climate change, while acknowledging that human activities are having an effect on climate:
|
American Geological Institute | |
---|---|
In 1999, the
American Geological Institute (AGI) issued the position statement ‘’Global Climate Change’’:
|
American Institute of Professional Geologists | |
---|---|
In 2009, the
American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG) sent a statement to President
Barack Obama and other US government officials:
|
Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences | |
---|---|
In
2001, the
Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences issued the position paper Mitigating climate change: Putting our carbon dioxide back into the ground:
|
With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change. [74]
Statements by individual scientists opposing the mainstream assessment of global warming do include claims that the observed warming is likely to be attributable to natural causes.
Various surveys have been conducted to determine a scientific consensus on global warming.
Doran and Kendall Zimmerman, 2009 | |
---|---|
A poll performed by
Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at
Earth and Environmental Sciences,
University of Illinois at Chicago received replies from 3,146 of the 10,257 polled Earth scientists. Results were analyzed globally and by specialization. 76 out of 79
climatologists who "listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the
subject of climate change" believe that mean global temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and 75 out of 77 believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. Among all respondents, 90% agreed that temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800 levels, and 82% agreed that humans significantly influence the global temperature. Economic geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in significant human involvement. A summary from the survey states that:
|
STATS, 2007 | |
---|---|
In 2007, Harris Interactive surveyed 489 randomly selected members of either the American Meteorological Society or the American Geophysical Union for the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. The survey found 97% agreed that global temperatures have increased during the past 100 years; 84% say they personally believe human-induced warming is occurring, and 74% agree that “currently available scientific evidence” substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that that human activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; and 84% believe global climate change poses a moderate to very great danger. [82] [83] |
Oreskes, 2004 | |
---|---|
A 2004 article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change. [84] The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, listed with the keywords "global climate change". Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. 75% of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories, thus either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change; none of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be "remarkable". According to the report, "authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point." |
Bray and von Storch, 2003 | |
---|---|
A survey was conducted in 2003 by Dennis Bray and
Hans von Storch.
[85]
[86] Bray's submission to
Science on December 22, 2004 was rejected, but the survey's results were reported through non-scientific venues.
[87]
[88] The survey received 530 responses from 27 different countries. One of the questions asked was "To what extent do you agree or disagree that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes?", with a value of 1 indicating strongly agree and a value of 7 indicating strongly disagree. The results showed a mean of 3.62, with 50 responses (9.4%) indicating "strongly agree" and 54 responses (9.7%) indicating "strongly disagree". The same survey indicates a 72% to 20% endorsement of the IPCC reports as accurate, and a 15% to 80% rejection of the thesis that "there is enough uncertainty about the phenomenon of global warming that there is no need for immediate policy decisions."
The survey has been criticized on the grounds that it was performed on the web with no means to verify that the respondents were climate scientists or to prevent multiple submissions. The survey required entry of a username and password, but the username and password were circulated to a climate skeptics mailing list and elsewhere on the internet. [89] [90] Bray and von Storch defended their results [91] and accused climate change skeptics of interpreting the results with bias. Bray and von Storch distributed an updated version of their survey in August 2008, sent to 1842 selected scientists drawn from authors in ISI listed climate related journals for the past 10 years, as well as lists used in previously published analyses. This survey contains a web link with a unique identifier for each respondent. Results of this survey are not yet available. |
Survey of U.S. state climatologists, 1997 | |
---|---|
In 1997, the conservative think tank
Citizens for a Sound Economy surveyed America's 48 state climatologists on questions related to climate change.
[92]
Of the 36 respondents, 44% considered global warming to be a largely natural phenomenon, compared to 17% who considered warming to be largely man-made. The survey further found that 58% disagreed or somewhat disagreed with then-President Clinton's assertion that "the overwhelming balance of evidence and scientific opinion is that it is no longer a theory, but now fact, that global warming is for real". Eighty-nine percent agreed that "current science is unable to isolate and measure variations in global temperatures caused ONLY by man-made factors," and 61% said that historical data do not indicate "that fluctuations in global temperatures are attributable to human influences such as burning fossil fuels." Sixty percent of the respondents said that reducing man-made CO2 emissions in the US by 15% below 1990 levels would not prevent global temperatures from rising, and 86% said that reducing emissions in the US to 1990 levels would not prevent rising temperatures. Thirty nine percent agreed and 33% disagreed that "evidence exists to suggest that the earth is headed for another glacial period," [93] though the time scale for the next glacial period was not specified. |
Bray and von Storch, 1996 | |
---|---|
In 1996, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch undertook a survey of climate scientists on attitudes towards global warming and related matters. The results were subsequently published in the
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.
[94] The paper addressed the views of climate scientists, with a response rate of 40% from a mail survey questionnaire to 1000 scientists in
Germany, the
USA and
Canada. Most of the scientists believed that global warming was occurring and appropriate policy action should be taken, but there was wide disagreement about the likely effects on society and almost all agreed that the predictive ability of currently existing models was limited.
The abstract says:
The survey was extensive, and asked numerous questions on many aspects of climate science, model formulation, and utility, and science/public/policy interactions. To pick out some of the more vital topics, from the body of the paper:
|
Older surveys of scientists | |
---|---|
*Global Environmental Change Report, 1990: GECR climate survey shows strong agreement on action, less so on warming. Global Environmental Change Report 2, No. 9, pp. 1-3
|
A question which frequently arises in popular discussion of climate change is whether there is a scientific consensus regarding human-caused global warming. Several scientific organizations have explicitly used the term "consensus" in their statements.
Declarations of consensus | |
---|---|
|
{{
cite document}}
: Cite document requires |publisher=
(
help); Unknown parameter |accessdate=
ignored (
help); Unknown parameter |url=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
The AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming.
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help) (
see also for an exchange of letters to Science)
The majority of climate scientists agree that global warming is primarily caused by human activities such as fossil fuel burning and deforestation. Environmental organizations, many governmental reports, and the non-U.S. media agree on this virtually unanimous scientific community agreement substantiating human-caused global warming, although there is less agreement on the specific consequences of this warming. Opponents either maintain that most scientists consider global warming "unproved," dismiss it altogether, or highlight the dangers of focusing on only one viewpoint in the context of unsettled science. [1] [2] [3]
National and international
science academies and
scientific societies have assessed the current
scientific opinion, in particular on recent
global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 that states:
An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. [4]
As of 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion. A few organisations hold non-committal positions.
Synthesis reports are assessments of scientific literature that compile the results of a range of stand-alone studies in order to achieve a broad level of understanding, or to describe the state of knowledge of a given subject. [5]
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007 | |
---|---|
In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming Fourth Assessment Report. According to this summary, the Fourth Assessment Report finds that human actions are "very likely" the cause of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability. Global warming in this case is indicated by an increase of 0.75 degrees in average global temperatures over the last 100 years. [6] The New York Times reported:
The Associated Press summarized the position on sea level rise:
|
U.S. Global Change Research Program | |
---|---|
formerly the
Climate Change Science Program
The U.S. Global Change Research Program reported in June, 2009 [10] that:
The report, which is about the effects that climate change is having in the United States, also says:
|
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment | |
---|---|
In 2004, the intergovernmental
Arctic Council and the non-governmental
International Arctic Science Committee released the synthesis report of the
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment
[11]:
|
European Academy of Sciences and Arts | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
European Academy of Sciences and Arts issued a formal declaration on climate change titled Let's Be Honest:
|
InterAcademy Council | |
---|---|
As the representative of the world’s
scientific and engineering academies,
[14]
[15] the
InterAcademy Council (IAC) issued a report in 2007 titled Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future.
|
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences (CAETS) issued a Statement on Environment and Sustainable Growth
[18]:
|
Joint science academies' statements | |
---|---|
Since 2001, 32
national science academies have come together to issue joint declarations confirming anthropogenic global warming, and urging the nations of the world to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The signatories of these statements have been the national science academies of
Australia,
Belgium,
Brazil,
Cameroon,
Canada, the
Caribbean,
China,
France,
Ghana,
Germany,
Indonesia,
Ireland,
Italy,
India,
Japan,
Kenya,
Madagascar,
Malaysia,
Mexico,
Nigeria,
New Zealand,
Russia,
Senegal,
South Africa,
Sudan,
Sweden,
Tanzania, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
|
Network of African Science Academies | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
Network of African Science Academies submitted a joint “statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change” to the leaders meeting at the G8 Summit in Heiligendamm, Germany:
The thirteen signatories were the science academies of Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, as well as the African Academy of Sciences. |
Royal Society of New Zealand | |
---|---|
Having signed onto the first joint science academies' statement in 2001, the
Royal Society of New Zealand released a separate statement in 2008 in order to clear up "the controversy over climate change and its causes, and possible confusion among the public":
|
Polish Academy of Sciences | |
---|---|
In December 2007, the General Assembly of the
Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) issued a statement endorsing the IPCC conclusions, and states:
|
National Research Council (US) | |
---|---|
In 2001, the Committee on the Science of Climate Change of the
National Research Council published Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions.
[27] This report explicitly endorses the IPCC view of attribution of recent climate change as representing the view of the scientific community:
|
Australian Institute of Physics | |
---|---|
In 2005, the Australian Institute of Physics (AIP) issued a science policy document in which they stated:
|
American Association for the Advancement of Science | |
---|---|
As the world's largest general scientific society, the
American Association for the Advancement of Science adopted an official statement on climate change in 2006:
|
American Chemical Society | |
---|---|
The
American Chemical Society stated:
|
American Institute of Physics | |
---|---|
The Governing Board of the
American Institute of Physics endorsed the AGU statement on human-induced climate change:
[31]
|
American Physical Society | |
---|---|
In November 2007, the
American Physical Society (APS) adopted an official statement on climate change:
|
European Science Foundation | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
European Science Foundation issued a Position Paper on climate change:
|
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS) issued a policy statement on climate change:
|
American Geophysical Union | |
---|---|
The
American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement,
[35] adopted by the society in 2003 and revised in 2007, affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:
|
European Federation of Geologists | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
European Federation of Geologists (EFG) issued the position paper Carbon Capture and geological Storage :
|
European Geosciences Union | |
---|---|
In 2005, the Divisions of Atmospheric and Climate Sciences of the
European Geosciences Union (EGU) issued a position statement in support of the
joint science academies’ statement on global response to climate change. The statement refers to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as "the main representative of the global
scientific community", and asserts that the IPCC
Additionally, in 2008, the EGU issued a position statement on ocean acidification which states, "Ocean acidification is already occurring today and will continue to intensify, closely tracking atmospheric CO2 increase. Given the potential threat to marine ecosystems and its ensuing impact on human society and economy, especially as it acts in conjunction with anthropogenic global warming, there is an urgent need for immediate action." The statement then advocates for strategies "to limit future release of CO2 to the atmosphere and/or enhance removal of excess CO2 from the atmosphere." [38] |
Geological Society of America | |
---|---|
In 2006, the
Geological Society of America adopted a position statement on global climate change:
|
Geological Society of Australia | |
---|---|
In July 2009, the
Geological Society of Australia issued the position statement Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change:
|
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics | |
---|---|
In July 2007, the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG) adopted a resolution titled “The Urgency of Addressing Climate Change”. In it, the IUGG concurs with the “comprehensive and widely accepted and endorsed scientific assessments carried out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and regional and national bodies, which have firmly established, on the basis of scientific evidence, that human activities are the primary cause of recent climate change.” They state further that the “continuing reliance on combustion of fossil fuels as the world’s primary source of energy will lead to much higher atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses, which will, in turn, cause significant increases in surface temperature, sea level, ocean acidification, and their related consequences to the environment and society.” [41] |
National Association of Geoscience Teachers | |
---|---|
In July 2009, the
National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT) adopted a position statement on climate change in which they assert that "Earth's climate is changing [and] "that present warming trends are largely the result of human activities":
|
American Meteorological Society | |
---|---|
The
American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2003 said:
|
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society | |
---|---|
The
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society has issued a Statement on Climate Change, wherein they conclude:
|
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences | |
---|---|
In November 2005, the
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS) issued a letter to the
Prime Minister of Canada stating that
|
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society | |
---|---|
|
Royal Meteorological Society (UK) | |
---|---|
In February 2007, after the release of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, the Royal Meteorological Society issued an endorsement of the report. In addition to referring to the IPCC as “world’s best climate scientists”, they stated that climate change is happening as “the result of emissions since industrialization and we have already set in motion the next 50 years of global warming – what we do from now on will determine how worse it will get.” [47] |
World Meteorological Organization | |
---|---|
In its Statement at the Twelfth Session of the Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change presented on November 15, 2006, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirms the need to “prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” The WMO concurs that “scientific assessments have increasingly reaffirmed that human activities are indeed changing the composition of the atmosphere, in particular through the burning of fossil fuels for energy production and transportation.” The WMO concurs that “the present atmospheric concentration of CO2 was never exceeded over the past 420,000 years;” and that the IPCC “assessments provide the most authoritative, up-to-date scientific advice.” |
American Quaternary Association | |
---|---|
The
American Quaternary Association (AMQUA) has stated
|
International Union for Quaternary Research | |
---|---|
The statement on climate change issued by the
International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA) reiterates the conclusions of the IPCC, and urges all nations to take prompt action in line with the
UNFCCC principles.
|
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians | |
---|---|
The
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians (AAWV) has issued a position statement regarding "climate change, wildlife diseases, and wildlife health":
|
American Society for Microbiology | |
---|---|
In 2003, the
American Society for Microbiology issued a public policy report in which they recommend “reducing net anthropogenic CO2 emissions to the atmosphere” and “minimizing anthropogenic disturbances of” atmospheric gases:
[52]
|
Australian Coral Reef Society | |
---|---|
In 2006, the
Australian Coral Reef Society issued an official communique regarding the
Great Barrier Reef and the "world-wide decline in
coral reefs through processes such as
overfishing, runoff of nutrients from the land,
coral bleaching, global climate change,
ocean acidification,
pollution", etc.:
|
Institute of Biology (UK) | |
---|---|
The UK's Institute of Biology states “there is scientific agreement that the rapid global warming that has occurred in recent years is mostly anthropogenic, ie due to human activity.” As a consequence of global warming, they warn that a “rise in sea levels due to melting of ice caps is expected to occur. Rises in temperature will have complex and frequently localised effects on weather, but an overall increase in extreme weather conditions and changes in precipitation patterns are probable, resulting in flooding and drought. The spread of tropical diseases is also expected.” Subsequently, the Institute of Biology advocates policies to reduce “greenhouse gas emissions, as we feel that the consequences of climate change are likely to be severe.” [57] |
Society of American Foresters | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
Society of American Foresters (SAF) issued two position statements pertaining to climate change in which they cite the IPCC and the UNFCCC:
|
The Wildlife Society (international) | |
---|---|
The Wildlife Society has issued a position statement titled Global Climate Change and Wildlife:
[60]
The statement goes on to assert that “evidence is accumulating that wildlife and wildlife habitats have been and will continue to be significantly affected by ongoing large-scale rapid climate change.” The statement concludes with a call for “reduction in anthropogenic (human-caused) sources of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions contributing to global climate change and the conservation of CO2- consuming photosynthesizers (i.e., plants).” |
American Academy of Pediatrics | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
American Academy of Pediatrics issued the policy statement Global Climate Change and Children's Health:
|
American College of Preventive Medicine | |
---|---|
In 2006, the
American College of Preventive Medicine issued a policy statement on “Abrupt Climate Change and Public Health Implications”:
|
American Medical Association | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
American Medical Association issued a policy statement on global climate change declaring that they:
|
American Public Health Association | |
---|---|
In 2007, the
American Public Health Association issued a policy statement titled ‘’Addressing the Urgent Threat of Global Climate Change to Public Health and the Environment’’:
|
Australian Medical Association | |
---|---|
In 2004, the
Australian Medical Association issued the position statement Climate Change and Human Health in which they recommend policies "to mitigate the possible consequential health effects of climate change through improved energy efficiency, clean energy production and other emission reduction steps."
[65]
This statement was revised again in 2008:
|
World Federation of Public Health Associations | |
---|---|
In 2001, the
World Federation of Public Health Associations issued a policy resolution on global climate change:
|
World Health Organization | |
---|---|
In 2008, the
United Nations'
World Health Organization issued their report Protecting health from climate change:
|
American Astronomical Society | |
---|---|
The
American Astronomical Society has endorsed the AGU statement:
[69]
|
American Statistical Association | |
---|---|
On November 30, 2007, the
American Statistical Association Board of Directors adopted a statement on climate change:
|
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia) | |
---|---|
|
International Association for Great Lakes Research | |
---|---|
In February 2009, the
International Association for Great Lakes Research (IAGLR) issued a Fact Sheet on climate change:
|
American Association of Petroleum Geologists | |
---|---|
The
American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) Position Statement on climate change states that
Prior to the adoption of this statement in June 2007, the AAPG was the only major scientific organization that rejected the finding of significant human influence on recent climate, according to a statement by the Council of the American Quaternary Association. [74] Explaining the plan for a revision, AAPG president Lee Billingsly wrote in March 2007 that
|
American Association of State Climatologists | |
---|---|
The Association has no current statement. The previous statement, discussed below, became inoperative in 2008.
[76]
The 2001 statement from the American Association of State Climatologists noted the difficulties with predicting impacts due to climate change, while acknowledging that human activities are having an effect on climate:
|
American Geological Institute | |
---|---|
In 1999, the
American Geological Institute (AGI) issued the position statement ‘’Global Climate Change’’:
|
American Institute of Professional Geologists | |
---|---|
In 2009, the
American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG) sent a statement to President
Barack Obama and other US government officials:
|
Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences | |
---|---|
In
2001, the
Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences issued the position paper Mitigating climate change: Putting our carbon dioxide back into the ground:
|
With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change. [74]
Statements by individual scientists opposing the mainstream assessment of global warming do include claims that the observed warming is likely to be attributable to natural causes.
Various surveys have been conducted to determine a scientific consensus on global warming.
Doran and Kendall Zimmerman, 2009 | |
---|---|
A poll performed by
Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at
Earth and Environmental Sciences,
University of Illinois at Chicago received replies from 3,146 of the 10,257 polled Earth scientists. Results were analyzed globally and by specialization. 76 out of 79
climatologists who "listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the
subject of climate change" believe that mean global temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and 75 out of 77 believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. Among all respondents, 90% agreed that temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800 levels, and 82% agreed that humans significantly influence the global temperature. Economic geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in significant human involvement. A summary from the survey states that:
|
STATS, 2007 | |
---|---|
In 2007, Harris Interactive surveyed 489 randomly selected members of either the American Meteorological Society or the American Geophysical Union for the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. The survey found 97% agreed that global temperatures have increased during the past 100 years; 84% say they personally believe human-induced warming is occurring, and 74% agree that “currently available scientific evidence” substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that that human activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; and 84% believe global climate change poses a moderate to very great danger. [82] [83] |
Oreskes, 2004 | |
---|---|
A 2004 article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change. [84] The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, listed with the keywords "global climate change". Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. 75% of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories, thus either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change; none of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be "remarkable". According to the report, "authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point." |
Bray and von Storch, 2003 | |
---|---|
A survey was conducted in 2003 by Dennis Bray and
Hans von Storch.
[85]
[86] Bray's submission to
Science on December 22, 2004 was rejected, but the survey's results were reported through non-scientific venues.
[87]
[88] The survey received 530 responses from 27 different countries. One of the questions asked was "To what extent do you agree or disagree that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes?", with a value of 1 indicating strongly agree and a value of 7 indicating strongly disagree. The results showed a mean of 3.62, with 50 responses (9.4%) indicating "strongly agree" and 54 responses (9.7%) indicating "strongly disagree". The same survey indicates a 72% to 20% endorsement of the IPCC reports as accurate, and a 15% to 80% rejection of the thesis that "there is enough uncertainty about the phenomenon of global warming that there is no need for immediate policy decisions."
The survey has been criticized on the grounds that it was performed on the web with no means to verify that the respondents were climate scientists or to prevent multiple submissions. The survey required entry of a username and password, but the username and password were circulated to a climate skeptics mailing list and elsewhere on the internet. [89] [90] Bray and von Storch defended their results [91] and accused climate change skeptics of interpreting the results with bias. Bray and von Storch distributed an updated version of their survey in August 2008, sent to 1842 selected scientists drawn from authors in ISI listed climate related journals for the past 10 years, as well as lists used in previously published analyses. This survey contains a web link with a unique identifier for each respondent. Results of this survey are not yet available. |
Survey of U.S. state climatologists, 1997 | |
---|---|
In 1997, the conservative think tank
Citizens for a Sound Economy surveyed America's 48 state climatologists on questions related to climate change.
[92]
Of the 36 respondents, 44% considered global warming to be a largely natural phenomenon, compared to 17% who considered warming to be largely man-made. The survey further found that 58% disagreed or somewhat disagreed with then-President Clinton's assertion that "the overwhelming balance of evidence and scientific opinion is that it is no longer a theory, but now fact, that global warming is for real". Eighty-nine percent agreed that "current science is unable to isolate and measure variations in global temperatures caused ONLY by man-made factors," and 61% said that historical data do not indicate "that fluctuations in global temperatures are attributable to human influences such as burning fossil fuels." Sixty percent of the respondents said that reducing man-made CO2 emissions in the US by 15% below 1990 levels would not prevent global temperatures from rising, and 86% said that reducing emissions in the US to 1990 levels would not prevent rising temperatures. Thirty nine percent agreed and 33% disagreed that "evidence exists to suggest that the earth is headed for another glacial period," [93] though the time scale for the next glacial period was not specified. |
Bray and von Storch, 1996 | |
---|---|
In 1996, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch undertook a survey of climate scientists on attitudes towards global warming and related matters. The results were subsequently published in the
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.
[94] The paper addressed the views of climate scientists, with a response rate of 40% from a mail survey questionnaire to 1000 scientists in
Germany, the
USA and
Canada. Most of the scientists believed that global warming was occurring and appropriate policy action should be taken, but there was wide disagreement about the likely effects on society and almost all agreed that the predictive ability of currently existing models was limited.
The abstract says:
The survey was extensive, and asked numerous questions on many aspects of climate science, model formulation, and utility, and science/public/policy interactions. To pick out some of the more vital topics, from the body of the paper:
|
Older surveys of scientists | |
---|---|
*Global Environmental Change Report, 1990: GECR climate survey shows strong agreement on action, less so on warming. Global Environmental Change Report 2, No. 9, pp. 1-3
|
A question which frequently arises in popular discussion of climate change is whether there is a scientific consensus regarding human-caused global warming. Several scientific organizations have explicitly used the term "consensus" in their statements.
Declarations of consensus | |
---|---|
|
{{
cite document}}
: Cite document requires |publisher=
(
help); Unknown parameter |accessdate=
ignored (
help); Unknown parameter |url=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
The AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming.
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help) (
see also for an exchange of letters to Science)