Revision as of 09:09, 22 October 2014 view sourcePolentarion (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,662 edits If the article doesnt deal with the IPCC, move redundant content where it belongs.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 20:28, 5 October 2024 view source RCraig09 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users18,749 edits →Consensus points: updating sourcing for updated chart . . . . removing word "current" before scientific consensus | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Evaluation of climate change by the scientific community}} | |||
{{Move portions|IPCC}} | |||
{{Pp|small=yes}} | |||
{{About| scientific opinion on the current climate change, or ]|public perception and controversy|Public opinion on climate change|and|Global warming controversy}} | |||
{{ |
{{Pp-move}} | ||
]. The green bars show uncertainty estimates. Source: ]] | |||
The '''scientific opinion on climate change''' is that the Earth's ] is unequivocally warming, and it is ''extremely likely'' (at least 95% probability) that humans are causing most of it through activities that increase concentrations of ]es in the atmosphere, such as ] and burning ]s. In addition, it is likely that some potential further greenhouse gas warming has been offset by increased ]s.<ref name="AR4-warming-unequivocal"/><ref name="ipcc">{{citation | |||
| author = IPCC | |||
| title = Detection and Attribution of Climate Change | |||
| chapter = Summary for Policymakers | |||
| chapter-url = http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ | |||
| quote = «It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century» (page 15) and «In this Summary for Policymakers, the following terms have been used to indicate the assessed likelihood of an outcome or a result: (...) extremely likely: 95–100%» (page 2). | |||
}}, in {{Harvnb|IPCC AR5 WG1|2013}}.</ref><ref name="ipcc1"/><ref name="AmericasClimateChoices-2010-SciPanel"/> This ] is expressed in ], by scientific bodies of national or international standing, and by surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their ] ], and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys. | |||
] from various scientific organizations show substantial agreement concerning the progress and extent of global warming: pairwise correlations for long-term datasets (1850+ and 1880+) exceed ].]] | |||
National and international ] and ] have assessed current ] on ]. These assessments are generally consistent with the conclusions of the ], the ] summarized: | |||
There is a nearly unanimous<!--File:20200324 Global average temperature - NASA-GISS HadCrut NOAA Japan BerkeleyE.svg and File:20211103 Academic studies of scientific consensus - global warming, climate change - vertical bar chart - en.svg--> ] that the ] since the start of the ], that the rate of recent warming is largely unprecedented,<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|8}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|11}} and that this warming is mainly the result of a rapid increase in atmospheric ] caused by human activities. The human activities causing this warming include ], ], and ] changes such as ],<ref>"Total radiative forcing is positive and has led to an uptake of energy by the climate system. The largest contribution to total radiative forcing is caused by the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO<sub>2</sub> since 1750." and "From 1750 to 2011, CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production have released 375 GtC to the atmosphere, while deforestation and other land-use change are estimated to have released 180 GtC." In: . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.</ref>{{rp|10–11}} with a significant supporting role from the other ]es such as ] and ].<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|7}} This human role in climate change is considered "unequivocal" and "incontrovertible".<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|4}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|4}} | |||
*Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as evidenced by increases in global average air and ocean ], the widespread melting of ] and ], and rising global average ].<ref> | |||
{{citation | |||
| title=1. Observed changes in climate and their effects | |||
| chapter=Summary for Policymakers | |||
| url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spms1.html | |||
| chapter-url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spm.html | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC AR4 SYR|2007}} | |||
</ref> | |||
*Most of the global warming since the mid-20th century is very likely due to ].<ref> | |||
{{citation | |||
| title=2. Causes of change | |||
| chapter=Summary for Policymakers | |||
| url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spms2.html | |||
| chapter-url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spm.html | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC AR4 SYR|2007}} | |||
</ref> | |||
*Benefits and costs of climate change for society will vary widely by location and scale.<ref name="parry social impacts"> | |||
{{citation | |||
| author=Parry, M.L., ''et al.'' | |||
| title=Industry, settlement and society, in: Box TS.5. The main projected impacts for systems and sectors | |||
| chapter=Technical summary | |||
| url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/tssts-4-1.html | |||
| chapter-url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ts.html | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC AR4 WG2|2007}} | |||
</ref> Some of the effects in ] and ]s will be positive and others elsewhere will be negative.<ref name="parry social impacts"/> Overall, net effects are more likely to be strongly negative with larger or more rapid warming.<ref name="parry social impacts"/> | |||
*The range of published evidence indicates that the net damage ] are likely to be significant and to increase over time.<ref> | |||
{{citation | |||
| author=IPCC | |||
| title= Magnitudes of impact | |||
| chapter=Summary for Policymakers | |||
| url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/spmsspm-c-15-magnitudes-of.html | |||
| chapter-url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/spm.html | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC AR4 WG2|2007}} | |||
</ref> | |||
*The resilience of many ]s is likely to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate change, associated disturbances (e.g. ]ing, ], ], ]s, ]) and other ] drivers (e.g. land-use change, ], fragmentation of natural systems, ] of resources).<ref> | |||
{{citation | |||
| title=Ecosystems, in: Sec 3.3.1 Impacts on systems and sectors | |||
| chapter=Synthesis report | |||
| url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/mains3-3-1.html | |||
| chapter-url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spm.html | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC AR4 SYR|2007}} | |||
</ref> | |||
No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these main points. The last national or international scientific body to drop dissent was the ],<ref name=AQAonAAPG/> which in 2007<ref name="aapg19"/> updated its statement to its current non-committal position.<ref name="Oreskes07p68"/> Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold ]. | |||
Nearly all actively publishing ] say humans are causing climate change.<ref name="Myers_2021" /><ref>{{cite journal|author=John Cook|display-authors= etal| title= Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming| journal= Environmental Research Letters |date=April 2016| doi=10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002|volume=11|issue=4|pages=048002|bibcode=2016ERL....11d8002C|doi-access=free}}</ref> Surveys of the scientific literature are another way to measure scientific consensus. A 2019 review of scientific papers found the consensus on the cause of climate change to be at 100%,<ref name="Powell2019" /> and a 2021 study concluded that over 99% of scientific papers agree on the human cause of climate change.<ref name="EnvRschLtrs_20211019" /> The small percentage of papers that disagreed with the consensus often contained errors or could not be replicated.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Benestad| first1=Rasmus E.|last2= Nuccitelli| first2= Dana|last3= Lewandowsky| first3= Stephan |last4=Hayhoe| first4= Katharine|last5=Hygen|first5=Hans Olav|last6=van Dorland| first6= Rob| last7=Cook|first7=John|date=1 November 2016|title=Learning from mistakes in climate research |journal= Theoretical and Applied Climatology |language=en|volume=126|issue=3|pages=699–703 |bibcode= 2016ThApC.126..699B|doi=10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5|issn=1434-4483 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
{{TOC limit|limit=4}} | |||
The evidence for global warming due to human influence has been recognized by the national science academies of all the major industrialized countries.<ref>{{cite web |year=2005 |title=Joint Science Academies' Statement |url=http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130909022954/http://www.nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf |archive-date=2013-09-09 |access-date=2014-04-20 |quote=It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001). This warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate.}}</ref> In the ], there is a very strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of ]es.<ref>{{Cite web |title='Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.' IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Working Group I, Summary for Policymakers. 'The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.' |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WGIAR5_SPM_brochure_en.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181022184656/https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WGIAR5_SPM_brochure_en.pdf |archive-date=22 October 2018 |access-date=26 December 2018}}</ref> No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Julie Brigham-Grette |author2=<Please add first missing authors to populate metadata.> |last3=Clague |last4=Cole |last5=Doran |last6=Gillespie |last7=Grimm |last8=Guccione |last9=Hughen |last10=Jackson |last11=Jull |last12=Leavitt |last13=Mandel |last14=Ortiz |last15=Rodbell |display-authors=1 |date=September 2006 |title=Petroleum Geologists' Award to Novelist Crichton Is Inappropriate |journal=] |volume=87 |issue=36 |pages=364 |bibcode=2006EOSTr..87..364B |doi=10.1029/2006EO360008 |quote=The AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming. |doi-access=free |last16=Schweger |last17=Smith |last18=Styles}}</ref> A few organizations with members in ] hold ],<ref>{{cite book |last1=DiMento |first1=Joseph F. C. |url=https://archive.org/details/climatechangewha00dime/page/68 |title=Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren |last2=Doughman |first2=Pamela M. |publisher=The MIT Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-262-54193-0 |page=}}</ref> and some have tried to persuade the public that climate change is not happening, or if the climate is changing it is not because of human influence,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Stoddard |first1=Isak |last2=Anderson |first2=Kevin |last3=Capstick |first3=Stuart |last4=Carton |first4=Wim |last5=Depledge |first5=Joanna |last6=Facer |first6=Keri |last7=Gough |first7=Clair |last8=Hache |first8=Frederic |last9=Hoolohan |first9=Claire |last10=Hultman |first10=Martin |last11=Hällström |first11=Niclas |last12=Kartha |first12=Sivan |last13=Klinsky |first13=Sonja |last14=Kuchler |first14=Magdalena |last15=Lövbrand |first15=Eva |display-authors=etal |date=18 October 2021 |title=Three Decades of Climate Mitigation: Why Haven't We Bent the Global Emissions Curve? |url=https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-011104 |journal=Annual Review of Environment and Resources |language=en |volume=46 |issue=1 |pages=653–689 |doi=10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-011104 |issn=1543-5938 |s2cid=233815004 |access-date=31 August 2022 |last16=Nasiritousi |first16=Naghmeh |last17=Newell |first17=Peter |last18=Peters |first18=Glen P. |last19=Sokona |first19=Youba |last20=Stirling |first20=Andy |last21=Stilwell |first21=Matthew |last22=Spash |first22=Clive L. |last23=Williams |first23=Mariama |hdl=1983/93c742bc-4895-42ac-be81-535f36c5039d|hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=Mann |first1=Michael E. |title=The Madhouse Effect |last2=Toles |first2=Tom |publisher=Columbia University Press |year=2016 |isbn=978-0231541817 |location=New York Chichester, West Sussex |doi=10.7312/mann17786}}</ref> attempting to ].<ref>{{Cite book |author1=Oreskes, Naomi |title=Merchants of doubt : how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming |author2=Conway, Erik |date=2012 |publisher=Bloomsbury |isbn=978-1408824832 |oclc=934374946}}</ref> {{TOC limit|limit=4}} | |||
==Synthesis reports== | |||
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.<ref name="Integration and Synthesis: Assessing Climate Change Impacts in Northern Canada"/> | |||
== Existence of a scientific consensus == | |||
===Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2014=== | |||
] | |||
{{Main|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|IPCC Fifth Assessment Report}} | |||
Studies of the scientific opinion on climate change have been undertaken since the 1970s,<ref name="NDU1978" /> and they have been establishing widespread consensus since the 1990s,<ref name="Stewart1992" /><ref name="BrayvonStorch1999" /> with the level of agreement increasing over time.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Cook|first1=John |last2=Oreskes|first2=Naomi |last3=Doran|first3=Peter T. |last4=Anderegg|first4=William R. L. |last5=Verheggen|first5=Bart |last6=Maibach|first6=Ed W. |last7=Carlton|first7=J. Stuart |last8=Lewandowsky|first8=Stephan |last9=Skuce|first9=Andrew G. |last10=Green|first10=Sarah A. |last11=Nuccitelli|first11=Dana |last12=Jacobs|first12=Peter |last13=Richardson|first13=Mark |last14=Winkler|first14=Bärbel |last15=Painting|first15=Rob |last16=Rice|first16=Ken |date=2016|title=Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming|journal=Environmental Research Letters|language=en|volume=11|issue=4|page=048002|doi=10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002|issn=1748-9326|bibcode=2016ERL....11d8002C|doi-access=free}}</ref> Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the scientific opinion on climate change via their ] ], while the scientific bodies of national or international standing summarise the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty in ].<ref name="Oreskes_consensus" /> | |||
===Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007=== | |||
Examples of such reports include or the 2004 ] from the ] and the governments of the ],<ref name="amap" /><ref name="Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly" /> or the United States' ], which has been released periodically since 2000 under the auspices of the ]. The fourth NCA, released in 2017, involved the efforts of thirteen federal agencies, led by the ] (NOAA),<ref name="USGCRP participants">{{cite web|url=https://www.globalchange.gov/agencies|title=US Government Agencies Participating in the USGCRP|date=20 October 2008 |work=Agencies|publisher=USGCRP|access-date=November 23, 2018}}</ref> and around "1,000 people, including 300 leading scientists, roughly half from outside the government."<ref name="CNN_Christensen_2018">{{cite news |url=https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/23/health/climate-change-report-bn/index.html |title=Climate change will shrink US economy and kill thousands, government report warns |first1=Jen |last1=Christensen |first2=Michael |last2=Nedelman |newspaper=CNN |date=November 23, 2018 |access-date=November 23, 2018}}</ref> | |||
In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming ]. 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.<ref name="Warming 'very likely' human-made"/> | |||
The ] (IPCC) had been formed by the ] in 1988,<ref>{{cite web |title=About the IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/about/ |access-date=22 February 2019 |publisher=Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=UN General Assembly Resolution 43/53 "Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind" |url=https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/530/32/IMG/NR053032.pdf?OpenElement |website=UN General Assembly Resolutions 43rd Session 1988–1989 |publisher=United Nations}}</ref> and it presents reports summarizing the strength and extent of consensus on climate change and ] to the ], with the major reports released at 5-to-7-year intervals starting from 1990.<ref>{{cite web |title=Annex C to Appendix C to the Principles Governing IPCC Work |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/documentation/procedures/ |website=IPCC Procedures |publisher=IPCC}}</ref>{{excerpt|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change#Assessment reports|paragraph=1|hat=no}} | |||
'']'' reported that “the leading international network of climate scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is 'unequivocal' and that human activity is the main driver, very likely' causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950”.<ref name="rosenthal"/> | |||
In 2001, science academies from 17 countries (Australia, ], Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, ], Ireland, Italy, ], New Zealand, Sweden, ], ] and the United Kingdom made a joint statement endorsing the work of IPCC. They concurred that the temperatures are rising and will continue to rise due to human activities, and also stressed the importance of cutting ], concluding that "Business as usual is no longer a viable option". It is also notable for being one of the first statements to explicitly use the term "consensus".<ref name="The Science of Climate Change" /> In 2005, another joint statement from the science academies of major countries (Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom and the United States referred to the conclusions of the IPCC as "the international scientific consensus", and urged prompt action on both ] and ].<ref name="nationalacademies21" /> Elsewhere around the world, other organizations to have referred to the scientific consensus include ] in 2007,<ref name="NASAC2007" /> and the ] in 2008.<ref name="inqua" /> | |||
A retired journalist for '']'', William K. Stevens wrote: “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said the likelihood was 90 percent to 99 percent that emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, spewed from tailpipes and smokestacks, were the dominant cause of the observed warming of the last 50 years. In the panel’s parlance, this level of certainty is labeled 'very likely'. Only rarely does scientific odds-making provide a more definite answer than that, at least in this branch of science, and it describes the endpoint, so far, of a progression.”.<ref name="On the Climate Change Beat, Doubt Gives Way to Certainty"/> | |||
In 2013, a study which found that out of over 4,000 ] papers on climate science published since 1990, 97% agree, explicitly or implicitly, that global warming is happening and is human-caused.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cook |first1=John |last2=Nuccitelli |first2=Dana |last3=Green |first3=Sarah A. |last4=Richardson |first4=Mark |last5=Winkler |first5=Bärbel |last6=Painting |first6=Rob |last7=Way |first7=Robert |last8=Jacobs |first8=Peter |last9=Skuce |first9=Andrew |title=Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature |journal=Environ. Res. Lett. |date=15 May 2013 |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=024024 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024 |publisher=IOP Publishing Ltd.|doi-access=free |bibcode=2013ERL.....8b4024C}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Scientific and Public Perspectives on Climate Change / Scientists' vs. Public Understanding of Human-Caused Global Warming |url=https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/scientific-and-public-perspectives-on-climate-change/ |website=climatecommunication.yale.edu |publisher=Yale University |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190417081857/http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/scientific-and-public-perspectives-on-climate-change/ |archive-date=17 April 2019 |date=29 May 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> Surveys of scientists' views on climate change – with a focus on human caused climate change – have been undertaken since the 1970s.<ref name="NDU1978" /><ref name="Stewart1992" /> A 2016 reanalysis confirmed that "the finding of 97% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies."<ref>{{citation |title=Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming |first1=John |last1=Cook |first2=Naomi |last2=Oreskes |first3=Peter T. |last3=Doran |first4=William R. L. |last4=Anderegg |first5=Bart |last5=Verheggen |first6=Ed W. |last6=Maibach |first7=J. Stuart |last7=Carlton |first8= Stephan |last8=Lewandowsky |first9= Andrew G. |last9=Skuce|first10=Sarah A. |last10=Green |date=2016 |journal=Environmental Research Letters |volume=11 |pages=048002 |number=44 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002 |bibcode=2016ERL....11d8002C |doi-access=free}}048002</ref> A 2019 study found scientific consensus to be at 100%,<ref name="Powell2019" /> and a 2021 study found that consensus exceeded 99%.<ref name="EnvRschLtrs_20211019" /> | |||
The ] summarized the position on sea level rise: | |||
{{quote|On sea levels, the report projects rises of 7 to 23 inches by the end of the century. An additional 3.9 to 7.8 inches are possible if recent, surprising melting of polar ice sheets continues.<ref name="foxnews"/>}} | |||
==Consensus points== | |||
===U.S. Global Change Research Program=== | |||
]) of long-lived atmospheric greenhouse gases has nearly doubled in 40 years.<ref name=NOAA_AGGI_2023>{{cite web |title=The NOAA Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI) |url=https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/aggi.html |website=NOAA.gov |publisher=National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241005195609/https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/aggi.html |archive-date=5 October 2024 |date=2024 |url-status=live }}</ref>]] | |||
''formerly the ]'' | |||
The scientific consensus regarding ] and mechanisms of ], ] and what should be done about it (]) is that: | |||
* It is "unequivocal" and "incontrovertible" that the ] from human activities have caused warming on land, in ] and in the ]. There are no natural processes which can provide an alternate explanation.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|4}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|4}} | |||
The ] reported in June 2009<ref name="globalchange"/> that: | |||
* The atmospheric levels of ] are the highest they have been in at least 2 million years,<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|8}} if not 3.2 million years.<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|11}} The atmospheric levels of two other major greenhouse gases, ] and ], are the highest they have been in at least the past 800,000 years. The record of the past 800,000 years also shows that the increases in their concentrations seen since 1750 would take ] to be caused by natural processes.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|8}} | |||
* The decade of ] has been {{convert|1.1|C-change|F-change}} warmer than the late 19th century, and the warmest since the start of a consistent ].<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|5}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|4}} The warming of the past 50 years has occurred faster than any other warming over the past 2,000 years, if not longer.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|8}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|11}} | |||
* ] appears to have been increasing since 1950, but the rainfall patterns ], and there is more evidence for increases in heavy precipitation which causes ]s.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|5,9}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|10,18}} | |||
* Global sea level has increased by {{cvt|20–25|cm|in|frac=2}} since 1900, with half of that increase occurring since 1980. This ] has been the fastest in "at least the last 3000 years", which is very likely to have been caused by human activity.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|5,8}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|4}} | |||
* As the recent warming ], its water expands in volume. This causes half of the recent sea level rise, with the rest due to the warming melting the ]s and ]s.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|11}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|35}} | |||
* While there have always been ] and ] events (e.g. ]s, ]s, ]s, ]s, ]s, precipitation extremes), climate change has made many of them more severe, more frequent, or more likely to co-occur, in every part of the globe.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|8–9, 15–16}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|4, 20}} | |||
* The dangers of extreme weather events will continue increasing unless there is a rapid decrease in greenhouse gas emissions needed to curb further warming.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|15}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|33}} | |||
* Increased warming will lead to worse impacts.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|15}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|21}} | |||
* The extent of human-caused emissions will be the main cause of future warming.<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM" />{{rp|13,15}}<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2" />{{rp|35}} | |||
== Statements by major scientific organizations about climate change == | |||
{{quote|Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with important contributions from the clearing of forests, agricultural practices, and other activities.}} | |||
{{Main|List of statements by major scientific organizations about climate change}} | |||
Many of the major scientific organizations about climate change have issued formal statements of opinion. The vast majority of these statements concur with the IPCC view, some very few are non-committal, or dissent from it. The California Governor's Office website lists nearly 200 worldwide scientific organizations who hold the position that climate change has been caused by human action.<ref>{{cite web|title=List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations|url=https://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html|publisher=California Governor's Office of Planning and Research|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240223070755/https://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html|archive-date=23 February 2024|url-status=live|access-date=10 August 2024}}</ref> | |||
==Surveys of scientists' views on climate change== | |||
The report, which is about the effects that climate change is having in the United States, also says: | |||
{{See also|History of climate change science}} | |||
===1970s=== | |||
{{quote|Climate-related changes have already been observed globally and in the United States. These include increases in air and water temperatures, reduced frost days, increased frequency and intensity of heavy downpours, a rise in sea level, and reduced snow cover, glaciers, permafrost, and sea ice. A longer ice-free period on lakes and rivers, lengthening of the growing season, and increased ] in the atmosphere have also been observed. Over the past 30 years, temperatures have risen faster in winter than in any other season, with average winter temperatures in the Midwest and northern Great Plains increasing more than 7°F. Some of the changes have been faster than previous assessments had suggested.}} | |||
] ("NCA4", USGCRP, 2017) includes charts<ref>{{cite journal |title=Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I – Chapter 3: Detection and Attribution of Climate Change |url=https://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/3/ |website=science2017.globalchange.gov |publisher=U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190923190450/https://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/3/ |archive-date=23 September 2019 |date=2017 |pages=1–470 |url-status=live}} Adapted directly from Fig. 3.3.</ref> illustrating how human factors, especially accumulation in the atmosphere of greenhouse gases, are the predominant cause of observed global warming.<ref name="4thNationalClimateAssessment_20181123" /> In the 1970s, these factors were less well-understood, and some scientists thought volcanic activity would have a stronger cooling effect than what we know now.]] | |||
In 1978, the ] of the United States had surveyed 24 experts about the near-term climate change and its ]. The majority of respondents had expected some warming to occur between 1970 and 2000, and described human emissions of carbon dioxide as the primary cause, but there was a disagreement on the extent, and a few had thought that an increase in volcanic activity would offset carbon dioxide emissions by elevating atmospheric ] concentrations (which have a reflective effect, also associated with ], and with some ] proposals) and result in overall cooling. When NDU had combined their predictions, they estimated a 10% likelihood of large (~{{convert|0.6|C-change|F-change}}) cooling occurring by 2000, a 25% likelihood of smaller cooling around {{convert|0.15|C-change|F-change}}, a 30% likelihood of limited change, with around {{convert|0.1|C-change|F-change}} warming, a 25% likelihood of "moderate" warming of ~{{convert|0.4|C-change|F-change}}, and a 10% likelihood of large warming of around {{convert|1|C-change|F-change}}.<ref name="NDU1978" /> Subsequently, about {{convert|0.5|C-change|F-change}} had occurred between 1950 and 2000, with about {{convert|0.4|C-change|F-change}} since 1970,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Roper |first=Willem |title=Global Warming Chart – Here's How Temperatures Have Risen Since 1950 |date=25 January 2021 |url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/global-warming-chart-average-temperatures-rising/ |publisher=] |access-date=5 November 2023}}</ref> largely matching the survey's "moderate global warming" scenario. | |||
===1980s=== | |||
===Arctic Climate Impact Assessment=== | |||
In 1989, David H. Slade had surveyed 21 climate scientists, of whom 17 had expressed "a strong belief" in "the reality of a significant climate change".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Slade |first1=David H. |year=1989 |title=A survey of informed opinion regarding the nature and reality of a 'global greenhouse warming' |journal=Climatic Change |volume=16 |pages=1–4 |doi=10.1007/BF00137342 |s2cid=153884762}}</ref><ref name="Stewart1992" /> | |||
In 2004, the intergovernmental ] and the non-governmental ] released the synthesis report of the ]:<ref name="Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly"/> | |||
=== 1990s === | |||
{{quote|Climate conditions in the past provide evidence that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are associated with rising global temperatures. Human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), and secondarily the clearing of land, have increased the concentration of carbon dioxide, methane, and other heat-trapping ("greenhouse") gases in the atmosphere...There is international scientific consensus that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.<ref name="amap"/>}} | |||
In March 1990, Cutter Information Corporation (now known as ]) sent questionnaires to 1500 researchers who were on the attendance lists of climate change conferences, and received 331 responses from 41 countries. The survey revealed widespread agreement that global warming is already happening, that it will result in negative impacts such as ], and that reducing carbon dioxide emissions and halting ] is an appropriate response to it. Only 1.9% of respondents predicted that there would be an overall cooling across the next 100 years. There was more disagreement on the strength of future warming: i.e. around 30% believed that there was a less than 50% chance that the warming would reach or exceed {{convert|2|C-change|F-change}} over the next 100 years, while a larger fraction (almost 40%) thought such temperatures were at least 75% likely.<ref>{{cite report |title=GECR climate survey shows strong agreement on action, less so on warming |publisher=Global Environmental Change Report |year=1990 |volume=2 |issue=9 |pages=1–3}}</ref><ref name="Stewart1992" /> | |||
In 1991, the Center for Science, Technology, and Media sent a survey of 6 questions to around 4000 ocean and atmospheric scientists from 45 countries, and received 118 responses by January 1992, with 91% from North America. Out of those 118 scientists, 73 have either agreed or "strongly" agreed with the statement "There is little doubt among scientists that global mean temperature will increase", while 27 had disagreed and only 9 had "strongly disagreed", with the remaining 9 "neutral". 58 scientists had agreed that the ] are expected to be "substantial" by the scientific community as a whole, with 36 disagreeing and 21 staying neutral. Finally, when asked about the 1990 IPCC estimate of warming proceeding at {{convert|0.3|F-change|C-change}} per decade throughout the 21st century under the business-as-usual ], 13 (15%) expressed skepticism, 39 (44%) had emphasized uncertainty, and 37 (42%) had agreed. 52% thought the rate of warming would likely be lower, and 8% thought it would be higher.<ref name="Stewart1992" /> As of 2023, the rate of warming had been {{convert|0.2|F-change|C-change}} or less.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://phys.org/news/2023-06-world-decade-scientists.html |title=World warming at record 0.2 C per decade, scientists warn |website=] |access-date=23 November 2023}}</ref> | |||
==Policy== | |||
{{See also|Avoiding dangerous climate change}} | |||
In 1996, Dennis Bray and ], a pair of researchers at the Helmholtz Research Centre's Institute for Coastal Research, sent a ] over mail to 1000 climate scientists in Germany, the United States and Canada. 40% responded, and the results subsequently published in the ] in 1999. On a scale of 1 out of 7, where ''higher'' numbers indicated greater ''disagreement'', "global warming is already underway" had a mean rating of 3.4, and "global warming will occur in the future" had an even greater agreement of 2.6 Surveyed scientists had less confidence in the accuracy of contemporary ]s, rating their ability to make "reasonable predictions" 10 years out at 4.8, and 5.2 for 100-year predictions: however, they consistently rejected the notion that there was too much uncertainty to justify taking immediate action, with a mean 5.6 out of 7 rating. In fact, they usually agreed there was substantial uncertainty about how strongly the impacts will affect society, and that many changes would likely be necessary ].<ref name="BrayvonStorch1999" /> | |||
There is an extensive discussion in the ] on what policies might be effective in responding to climate change.<ref name="ar4 policy assessment">The literature has been assessed by the IPCC, e.g., see: | |||
*{{citation | |||
| title=Ch 17: Assessment of Adaptation Practices, Options, Constraints and Capacity | |||
| url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch17.html | |||
| author=Adger, W.N., ''et al.'' | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC AR4 WG2|2007}} | |||
*{{citation | |||
| title=Technical summary | |||
| url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ts.html | |||
| author=Barker, T., ''et al.'' | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC AR4 WG3|2007}} | |||
</ref> Some scientific bodies have recommended specific policies to governments (refer to the later sections of the article).<ref name="nationalacademies6"/> The ] and ]s can play a role in informing an effective response to climate change.<ref name="tar value judgements"> | |||
{{citation | |||
| title=1.1 | |||
| url=http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/vol4/english/017.htm | |||
| chapter=Question 1 | |||
}}, in {{harvnb|IPCC TAR SYR|2001|p=38}} | |||
</ref> However, policy decisions may require ]s.<ref name="tar value judgements"/> For example, the ] has commented:<ref> | |||
, in {{harvnb|US NRC|2001|p=4}} | |||
</ref><blockquote>The question of whether there exists a "safe" level of concentration of greenhouse gases cannot be answered directly because it would require a value judgment of what constitutes an acceptable risk to human welfare and ecosystems in various parts of the world, as well as a more quantitative assessment of the risks and costs associated with the various impacts of global warming. In general, however, risk increases with increases in both the rate and the magnitude of climate change.</blockquote> | |||
=== 2000–2004 === | |||
This article mostly focuses on the views of natural scientists. However, social scientists,<ref name="ar4 policy assessment"/> ]al experts,<ref> | |||
In 2003, Bray and von Storch repeated their 1996 survey, using the same response structure with ratings on a 1–7 scale, and including all of the original questions. Further, new questions were added, which were devoted to ] and ]. This second survey received 530 responses from 27 different countries, but it has been strongly 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. While the survey required entry of a username and password, its critics alleged that both were circulated to non-scientists, including to a ] mailing list. Bray and von Storch defended their results, claiming that a ] with a ] and a ] revealed no significant irregularities.<ref name="BrayvonStorch2003" /> | |||
{{citation | |||
| title=Doha Declaration on Climate, Health and Wellbeing | |||
| url=http://dohadeclaration.weebly.com/ | |||
}}. This statement has been signed by numerous medical organizations, including the ]. | |||
</ref> engineers<ref name="ar4 policy assessment"/> and philosophers<ref> | |||
{{citation | |||
| title=The Ethics of Global Climate Change | |||
| date=March 2011 | |||
| publisher=Cambridge University Press | |||
| url=http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item5744232/?site_locale=en_GB | |||
| isbn=9781107000698 | |||
| editor=Arnold, D.G. | |||
}} | |||
</ref> have also commented on climate change science and policies. Climate change policy is discussed in several articles: ], ], ], ], ], and ]. | |||
In general, the second survey had demonstrated an increase in scientific confidence relative to the first. One of the greatest increases was for the statement "We can say for certain that global warming is a process already underway", where 1 represented strong agreement and 7 strong disagreement: the mean response went from 3.39 to 2.41. In response to the question, "To what extent do you agree or disagree that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes?", it went from 4.17 to 3.62.<ref name="BrayvonStorch2003" /> Notably, the percentage of respondents "strongly disagreeing" stayed the same, at 10%, and a similar percentage stayed neutral (14% in 1996 and 13% in 2003): yet, the overall split went from 41% agreement and 45% disagreement in 1996 to 56% agreement and 30% disagreement in 2003, as there was both a substantial increase in agreement and a decline percentage of those disagreeing less strongly.<ref>{{cite web |title=Climate scientists' views on climate change: a survey |date=8 August 2007 |url=http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/08/climate_scientists_views_on_cl_1.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120113114849/http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/08/climate_scientists_views_on_cl_1.html |archive-date=13 January 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref> Similarly, there was a 72% to 20% split in favour of describing 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."<ref name="BrayvonStorch2003" /> | |||
==Statements by scientific organizations of national or international standing== | |||
{{Split section|date=August 2014}} | |||
{{See also|Global warming controversy#Mainstream scientific position, and challenges to it}} | |||
This is a list of scientific bodies of national or international standing, that have issued formal statements of opinion, classifies those organizations according to whether they concur with the IPCC view, are non-committal, or dissent from it. | |||
In 2004, the geologist and historian of science ] analyzed the ] of 928 scientific papers on "global climate change" published between 1993 and 2003. 75% had either explicitly expressed support for the ] on anthropogenic climate change, or had accepted it as a given and were focused on evaluating its ] or proposing approaches for ], while the remaining 25% were devoted to methods of current climate change research or ] analysis. No abstract had explicitly rejected the scientific consensus.<ref>{{cite journal | author=Naomi Oreskes | date=3 December 2004 | title=Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change | journal=Science | volume=306 | issue=5702 | page=1686 | doi=10.1126/science.1103618 | url=http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/306/5702/1686.pdf | pmid=15576594| s2cid=153792099 | doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
===Concurring=== | |||
=== 2005–2009 === | |||
====Academies of science (general science)==== | |||
] | |||
In 2007, ] surveyed 489 randomly selected members of either the ] or the ] for the ] (STATS) at ], publishing the results in April 2008. 97% of the scientists surveyed agreed that global temperatures had increased during the past 100 years, and only 5% believed that human activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming. 84% said they personally believed human-induced warming was occurring, and 74% agreed that "currently available scientific evidence" substantiated its occurrence. 56% described the study of global climate change as a mature science and 39% as an emerging science. When asked about the likely severity of ] over the next 50–100 years, 41% said they could be described as catastrophic; 44% thought the effects would be moderately dangerous while about 13% thought there was relatively little danger.<ref>{{cite web |last=Lichter |first=S. Robert |url=http://stats.org/stories/2008/global_warming_survey_apr23_08.html |title=Climate Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Don't Trust the Media's Coverage of Climate Change |publisher=Statistical Assessment Service, George Mason University |date=24 April 2008 |access-date=20 January 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100111104946/http://stats.org/stories/2008/global_warming_survey_apr23_08.html |archive-date=11 January 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/climate-change/structure-scientific-opinion-climate-change/|title="Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change" |publisher=Journalist's Resource.org}}</ref><ref name="The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change" /><ref>{{cite web |last= Lavelle |first= Marianne|url=https://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/04/23/survey-tracks-scientists-growing-climate-concern.html |title=Survey Tracks Scientists' Growing Climate Concern |publisher=U.S. News & World Report |date=23 April 2008 |access-date=20 January 2010}}</ref> | |||
The third Dennis Bray and ] survey was also conducted in 2008, with the results published in 2010. It used the same methodology as their two previous surveys, with a similar number of sections and also asking to rate responses on a 1-to-7 scale (i.e. from 'not at all' to 'very much'), but it had also introduced web links with respondent-specific unique identifiers to eliminate multiple responses. 2058 climate scientists from 34 countries were surveyed, and a total of 373 responses were received (response rate of 18.2%). | |||
Since 2001, 34 ], three regional academies, and both the international ] and ] have made formal declarations confirming human induced global warming and urging nations to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The 34 national science academy statements include 33 who have signed joint science academy statements and one individual declaration by the ] in 2007. | |||
To the question "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 67.1% said they very much agreed (7), 26.7% agreed to some large extent (6), 6.2% said to they agreed to some small extent (2–4), none said they did not agree at all. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?" the responses were 34.6% very much agree, 48.9% agreeing to a large extent, 15.1% to a small extent, and 1.35% not agreeing at all. Similarly, 34.6% had very much agreed that climate change "poses a very serious and dangerous threat to humanity" and 27.6% agreed to a large extent, while only 1.1% did not agree at all. | |||
=====Joint national science academy statements===== | |||
At the same time, the respondents had strongly rejected the concept of intentionally presenting the most extreme possibilities in the hope of mobilizing the public, with around 73% disagreeing (1–3), 12.5% unsure and 14.5% agreeing in any way (5–7). Only 1.6% had agreed very much, while 27.2% did not agree at all, even as they overwhelmingly agreed (84% vs. 4%) that the scientists who do this are the most likely to be listened to by journalists. The respondents have generally expressed high confidence in the IPCC reports, with 63.5% agreeing that they estimated the impacts of temperature change exactly right (4 on the scale), and only 1.4% responding that they had strongly underestimated and 2.5% that they had strongly overestimated those impacts (1 and 7 on a scale.) On ], 51.4% thought the reports were exactly right, and only about 16% thought it was overestimated in any way (5–7), while the remaining third believed it was underestimated (1–3).<ref>{{cite web |first1=Dennis |last1=Bray |first2=Hans |last2=von Storch |year=2010 |url=https://ncse.ngo/files/pub/polls/2010--Perspectives_of_Climate_Scientists_Concerning_Climate_Science_&_Climate_Change_.pdf |title=A Survey of the Perspectives of Climate Scientists Concerning Climate Science and Climate Change}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Bray |first=Dennis |date=August 2010 |title=The scientific consensus of climate change revisited |url=http://www.hzg.de/imperia/md/content/gkss/zentrale_einrichtungen/bibliothek/journals/2010/Bray-envscipol.pdf |journal=Environmental Science & Policy |volume=13 |issue=5 |pages=340–350 |doi=10.1016/j.envsci.2010.04.001}}, copy online at </ref><ref>{{cite journal|author=Bray, D.|author2=von Storch H. |year=2009 |title=Prediction' or 'Projection; The nomenclature of climate science |journal=] |volume=30 |pages=534–543 |doi=10.1177/1075547009333698 |issue=4|s2cid=145338218 |url=http://www.hzg.de/imperia/md/content/gkss/zentrale_einrichtungen/bibliothek/journals/2009/bray_27111.pdf}}</ref> Subsequent IPCC reports had been forced to regularly increase their estimates of future sea level rise, largely in response to newer research on the ]s of ] and ].<ref>{{cite news |title=Ice sheet melt on track with 'worst-case climate scenario' |language=en |work=www.esa.int |url=https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Space_for_our_climate/Ice_sheet_melt_on_track_with_worst-case_climate_scenario |access-date=8 September 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Slater |first1=Thomas |last2=Hogg |first2=Anna E. |last3=Mottram |first3=Ruth |author-link3=Ruth Mottram |date=31 August 2020 |title=Ice-sheet losses track high-end sea-level rise projections |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0893-y |journal=Nature Climate Change |language=en |volume=10 |issue=10 |pages=879–881 |bibcode=2020NatCC..10..879S |doi=10.1038/s41558-020-0893-y |issn=1758-6798 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200902132539/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0893-y |archive-date=2 September 2020 |access-date=8 September 2020 |s2cid=221381924}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Grinsted |first1=Aslak |last2=Christensen |first2=Jens Hesselbjerg |date=2021-02-02 |title=The transient sensitivity of sea level rise |url=https://os.copernicus.org/articles/17/181/2021/ |journal=Ocean Science |volume=17 |issue=1 |pages=181–186 |bibcode=2021OcSci..17..181G |doi=10.5194/os-17-181-2021 |issn=1812-0784 |s2cid=234353584 |doi-access=free|hdl=11250/3135359 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Fox-Kemper |first1=B. |last2=Hewitt |first2=H.T.|author2-link=Helene Hewitt |last3=Xiao |first3=C. |last4=Aðalgeirsdóttir |first4=G. |last5=Drijfhout |first5=S.S. |last6=Edwards |first6=T.L. |last7=Golledge |first7=N.R. |last8=Hemer |first8=M. |last9=Kopp |first9=R.E. |last10=Krinner |first10=G. |last11=Mix |first11=A. |date=2021 |editor-last=Masson-Delmotte |editor-first=V. |editor2-last=Zhai |editor2-first=P. |editor3-last=Pirani |editor3-first=A. |editor4-last=Connors |editor4-first=S.L. |editor5-last=Péan |editor5-first=C. |editor6-last=Berger |editor6-first=S. |editor7-last=Caud |editor7-first=N. |editor8-last=Chen |editor8-first=Y. |editor9-last=Goldfarb |editor9-first=L. |title=Chapter 9: Ocean, Cryosphere and Sea Level Change |journal=Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter09.pdf |publisher=Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, US |pages=1302}}</ref> | |||
* 2001 Following the publication of the ], seventeen national science academies issued a joint statement, entitled "The Science of Climate Change", explicitly acknowledging the IPCC position as representing the scientific consensus on climate change science. The statement, printed in an editorial in the journal '']'' on May 18, 2001,<ref name="Editorial: The Science of Climate Change"/> was signed by the science academies of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.<ref name="The Science of Climate Change"/> | |||
* 2005 The national science academies of the ] nations, plus Brazil, China and India, three of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the developing world, signed a statement on the global response to climate change. The statement stresses that the scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action, and explicitly endorsed the IPCC consensus. The eleven signatories were the science academies of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.<ref name="nationalacademies"/> | |||
* 2007 In preparation for the ], the national science academies of the ] nations issued a declaration referencing the position of the 2005 joint science academies' statement, and acknowledging the confirmation of their previous conclusion by recent research. Following the ], the declaration states, "It is unequivocal that the climate is changing, and it is very likely that this is predominantly caused by the increasing human interference with the atmosphere. These changes will transform the environmental conditions on ] unless counter-measures are taken." The thirteen signatories were the national science academies of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States.<ref name="pik-potsdam"/> | |||
* 2007 In preparation for the ], the ] submitted a joint “statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change” : {{quote|A consensus, based on current evidence, now exists within the global scientific community that human activities are the main source of climate change and that the burning of fossil fuels is largely responsible for driving this change. The IPCC should be congratulated for the contribution it has made to public understanding of the nexus that exists between energy, climate and sustainability. | The thirteen signatories were the science academies of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], as well as the ] | <ref name="autogenerated1"/>}} | |||
* 2008 In preparation for the ], the national science academies of the G8+5 nations issued a declaration reiterating the position of the 2005 joint science academies’ statement, and reaffirming “that climate change is happening and that anthropogenic warming is influencing many physical and biological systems.” Among other actions, the declaration urges all nations to “(t)ake appropriate economic and policy measures to accelerate transition to a ] and to encourage and effect changes in individual and national behaviour.” The thirteen signatories were the same national science academies that issued the 2007 joint statement.<ref name="nationalacademies5"/> | |||
* 2009 In advance of the ] negotiations to be held in ] in December 2009, the national science academies of the G8+5 nations issued a joint statement declaring, "Climate change and sustainable energy supply are crucial challenges for the future of humanity. It is essential that world leaders agree on the emission reductions needed to combat negative consequences of anthropogenic climate change". The statement references the IPCC's Fourth Assessment of 2007, and asserts that "climate change is happening even faster than previously estimated; global {{CO2}} emissions since 2000 have been higher than even the highest predictions, Arctic sea ice has been melting at rates much faster than predicted, and the rise in the sea level has become more rapid." The thirteen signatories were the same national science academies that issued the 2007 and 2008 joint statements.<ref name="nationalacademies6"/> | |||
In 2009, ] and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at ] polled 10,257 ]s from various specialities and received replies from 3,146. 79 respondents were ] who had published over half of their ] research on the subject of climate change, and 76 of them agreed that mean global temperatures had risen compared to pre-1800s levels, with 75 describing human activity as a significant factor. Among all respondents, 90% agreed that temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800 levels, and 82% agreed that humans significantly influence the global temperature. ]s and ]s were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in significant human involvement. In summary, Doran and Zimmerman wrote:<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Peter T.|last1=Doran |last2=Zimmerman |first2=Maggie Kendall |date=20 January 2009 |title=Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change |journal=] |volume=90 |issue=3 |pages=22–23 |doi=10.1029/2009EO030002 |url=https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2009EO030002 |bibcode=2009EOSTr..90...22D |s2cid=128398335}}</ref> | |||
=====Polish Academy of Sciences===== | |||
In December 2007, the General Assembly of the ] (Polska Akademia Nauk), which has not been a signatory to ] issued a declaration endorsing the IPCC conclusions, and stating: | |||
{{quote|it is the duty of Polish science and the national government to, in a thoughtful, organized and active manner, become involved in realisation of these ideas. | |||
{{blockquote|It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes.}} | |||
Problems of global warming, climate change, and their various negative impacts on human life and on the functioning of entire societies are one of the most dramatic challenges of modern times. | |||
=== 2010–2014 === | |||
PAS General Assembly calls on the national scientific communities and the national government to actively support Polish participation in this important endeavor.<ref name="Stanowisko Zgromadzenia Ogólnego PAN z dnia 13 grudnia 2007 r"/>}} | |||
A 2010 paper in the ] reviewed publication and citation data for 1,372 climate researchers, 908 of whom had authored 20 or more publications on climate, and found that | |||
<blockquote>(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.<ref>{{cite journal |title= Expert credibility in climate change|journal= Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume= 107|issue= 27|pages= 12107–12109|author1=William R. L. Anderegg |author2=James W. Prall |author3=Jacob Harold |author4=Stephen H. Schneider |name-list-style=amp |date= April 9, 2010|doi= 10.1073/pnas.1003187107|pmid = 20566872|pmc= 2901439|bibcode= 2010PNAS..10712107A|doi-access= free}}</ref><ref> by ], "Science Insider", ], 21 June 2010</ref> | |||
=====Additional national science academy and society statements===== | |||
</blockquote> | |||
In October 2011, researchers from ] analyzed the results of a survey of 998 actively working scientists from the ], the ], or listed in the 23rd edition of ], 489 of whom had returned completed questionnaires. 97% of respondents had agreed that global temperatures have risen over the past century. 84% agreed that "human-induced greenhouse warming is now occurring," 5% disagreed, and 12% didn't know.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/climate-change/structure-scientific-opinion-climate-change/|title="Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change" at Journalist's Resource.org}}</ref><ref name="FL2011">{{cite journal |url= http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/10/27/ijpor.edr033.short|title= The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change|journal= International Journal of Public Opinion Research|volume= 24|pages= 93–103|author1=Stephen J. Farnsworth |author2=S. Robert Lichter |date= 27 October 2011|access-date= 2 December 2011 |doi= 10.1093/ijpor/edr033}} Paywalled; full test online , retrieved 30 November 2014. From Table I, "Q: In your opinion, is human-induced greenhouse warming now occurring?" Yes, 84%. No, 5%. Don't Know, 12%</ref> When asked what they regard as "the likely effects of global climate change in the next 50 to 100 years," on a scale of 1 to 10, from Trivial to Catastrophic: 13% of respondents replied 1 to 3 (trivial/mild), 44% replied 4 to 7 (moderate), 41% replied 8 to 10 (severe/catastrophic), and 2% didn't know.<ref name="FL2011" /> | |||
* ] as the world's largest general scientific society, adopted an official statement on climate change in 2006: {{quote|The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society....The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now.<ref name="aaas board"/>}} | |||
* ] in 2008 published ''FASTS Statement on Climate Change''<ref name="FASTS Statement on Climate Change"/> which states: {{quote|Global climate change is real and measurable...To reduce the global net economic, environmental and social losses in the face of these impacts, the policy objective must remain squarely focused on returning greenhouse gas concentrations to near pre-industrial levels through the reduction of emissions. The spatial and temporal fingerprint of warming can be traced to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, which are a direct result of burning fossil fuels, broad-scale deforestation and other human activity.}} | |||
* ] through its Committee on the Science of Climate Change in 2001, published ''Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions''.<ref name="CCSAASKQ">{{cite book |author=Committee on the Science of Climate Change, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council |title=Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions |publisher=National Academy Press |location=Washington DC |year=2001 |isbn=0-309-07574-2 |url=http://books.nap.edu/html/climatechange}}</ref> This report explicitly endorses the IPCC view of attribution of recent climate change as representing the view of the scientific community: {{quote|The changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural variability. Human-induced warming and associated sea level rises are expected to continue through the 21st century... The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue.<ref name=CCSAASKQ />}} | |||
* ] having signed onto the first joint science academy statement in 2001, 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": {{quote|The globe is warming because of increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Measurements show that greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere are well above levels seen for many thousands of years. Further global climate changes are predicted, with impacts expected to become more costly as time progresses. Reducing future impacts of climate change will require substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.<ref name="Climate change statement from the Royal Society of New Zealand"/>}} | |||
* The ] of the United Kingdom has not changed its concurring stance reflected in its participation in ] on anthropogenic global warming. According to the ], "The most prestigious group of scientists in the country was forced to act after fellows complained that doubts over man made global warming were not being communicated to the public".<ref name="telegraph.co.uk"/> In May 2010, it announced that it "is presently drafting a new public facing document on climate change, to provide an updated status report on the science in an easily accessible form, also addressing the levels of certainty of key components."<ref name="RS-CC"/> The society says that it is three years since the last such document was published and that, after an extensive process of debate and review,<ref name="Society to review climate message"/><ref name="Some excitable climate-change deniers just don't understand what science is"/> the new document was printed in September 2010. It summarises the current scientific evidence and highlights the areas where the science is well established, where there is still some debate, and where substantial uncertainties remain. The society has stated that "this is not the same as saying that the climate science itself is in error – no Fellows have expressed such a view to the RS".<ref name="RS-CC"/> The introduction includes this statement: {{quote|There is strong evidence that the warming of the Earth over the last half-century has been caused largely by human activity, such as the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use, including agriculture and deforestation.}} | |||
In 2012, ], a former member of the ], analyzed published research on global warming and climate change between 1991 and 2012 and found that of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 (<0.2%) rejected anthropogenic global warming.<ref>{{citation |title=The State of Climate Science: A Thorough Review of the Scientific Literature on Global Warming |first=James Lawrence |last=Powell |author-link=James L. Powell |date=15 November 2012 |url=https://scienceprogress.org/2012/11/27479/ |work=Science Progress |access-date=21 September 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |isbn=978-0-231-15718-6 |title=The Inquisition of Climate Science |first=James Lawrence |last=Powell |author-link=James L. Powell |publisher=Columbia University Press |date=2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Plait|first=P.|date=11 December 2012|title=Why Climate Change Denial Is Just Hot Air|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/11/climate_change_denial_why_don_t_they_publish_scientific_papers.html |newspaper=Slate |access-date=12 June 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/11/chart-only-017-percent-peer-reviewed-papers-question-global-warming | title=CHART: Only 0.17 Percent of Peer-Reviewed Papers Question Global Warming | work=] | date=1 December 2012 | access-date=12 February 2014 | author=Sheppard, Kate}}</ref> This was a follow-up to an analysis looking at 2,258 peer-reviewed articles published between November 2012 and December 2013, which revealed that only one of the 9,136 authors rejected anthropogenic global warming.<ref>{{cite news|last=Plait|first=P.|date=14 January 2014|title=The Very, Very Thin Wedge of Denial |url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/01/14/climate_change_another_study_shows_they_don_t_publish_actual_papers.html |newspaper=Slate |access-date=12 June 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.popsci.com/article/science/infographic-scientists-who-doubt-human-caused-climate-change | title=Infographic: Scientists Who Doubt Human-Caused Climate Change | work=] | date=10 January 2014 | access-date=12 February 2014 | author=Gertz, Emily}}</ref><ref>The study in question was: {{Cite journal | doi = 10.1134/S1019331613030015| title = The role of solar activity in global warming| journal = Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences| volume = 83| issue = 3| pages = 275–285| year = 2013| last1 = Avakyan | first1 = S. V.| bibcode = 2013HRuAS..83..275A| s2cid = 154047107}}</ref> | |||
=====International science academies===== | |||
Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch had conducted their fourth survey in 2013, publishing its results the following year. 283 scientists had responded: 185 (65.4%) had been working in climate science for over 15 years, and only 19 (6.7%) had 0 to 5 years of experience. It had the same methodology as the third survey, ranking responses on a 1-to-7 scale and similar responses to the same questions: i.e., when asked, "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 74.7% said they very much agreed (7), 2.9% were "neutral" (4), and only 2.1% were 1–3 on the scale. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?", 43% had very much agreed, 28.5% agreeing to a large extent (6), 16.6% to a small extent (2–4), and 2.5% did not agree at all (1). 41.8% had very much agreed that climate change "poses a very serious and dangerous threat to humanity" and 23.2% agreed to a large extent, while 3.5% did not agree at all. A new question asked respondents to attribute a ''percentage'' of recent warming to anthropogenic causes: 73.3% of scientists attributed 70–100%, while only 1.5% said there was zero human role.<ref>{{cite web |first1=Dennis |last1=Bray |first2=Hans |last2=von Storch |year=2014 |url=https://www.hereon.de/imperia/md/content/hzg/zentrale_einrichtungen/bibliothek/berichte/hzg_reports_2014/hzg_report_2014_4.pdf |title=A survey of the perceptions of climate scientists 2013}}</ref> | |||
* ] in 2007 was a signatory to the "statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change", the ], organized through the ], confirming anthropogenic global warming and presented to the leaders meeting at the ], Germany. | |||
] | |||
* ] in 2007 issued a formal declaration on climate change titled ''Let's Be Honest'': {{quote|Human activity is most ''likely'' responsible for climate warming. Most of the climatic warming over the last 50 years is ''likely'' to have been caused by increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Documented long-term climate changes include changes in Arctic temperatures and ice, widespread changes in precipitation amounts, ocean salinity, wind patterns and ] including droughts, heavy precipitation, heat waves and the intensity of tropical cyclones. The above development potentially has dramatic consequences for mankind’s future.<ref name="euro-acad"/>}} | |||
In 2013, another scientist, John Cook, examined 11,944 abstracts from the peer-reviewed scientific literature from 1991 to 2011 that matched the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.<ref name="John Cook 2013" /> He and his co-authors found that, while 66.4% of them expressed no position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), of those that did, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are contributing to global warming. They also invited authors to rate their own papers and found that, while 35.5% rated their paper as expressing no position on AGW (known to be expected in a consensus situation{{sfn|Oreskes|2007|p=72|ps=: " generally focus their discussions on questions that are still disputed or unanswered rather than on matters about which everyone agrees"}}) 97.2% of the rest endorsed the consensus. In both cases the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position was marginally increasing over time. They concluded that the number of papers actually rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research, and that "the fundamental science of AGW is no longer controversial among the publishing science community and the remaining debate in the field has moved on to other topics."<ref name="John Cook 2013" /> | |||
* ] in a 2007 position paper <ref name="European Science Foundation Position Paper ''Impacts of Climate Change on the European Marine and Coastal Environment — Ecosystems Approach''"/> states: {{quote|There is now convincing evidence that since the industrial revolution, human activities, resulting in increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases have become a major agent of climate change... On-going and increased efforts to mitigate climate change through reduction in greenhouse gases are therefore crucial.}} | |||
* ] As the representative of the world’s ],<ref name="nytimes"/><ref name="interacademycouncil"/> the InterAcademy Council issued a report in 2007 titled ''Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future''. {{quote|Current patterns of energy resources and energy usage are proving detrimental to the long-term welfare of humanity. The integrity of essential natural systems is already at risk from climate change caused by the atmospheric emissions of greenhouse gases.<ref name="interacademycouncil7"/> Concerted efforts should be mounted for improving energy efficiency and reducing the carbon intensity of the world economy.<ref name="interacademycouncil8"/>}} | |||
* ] (CAETS) in 2007, issued a ''Statement on Environment and Sustainable Growth'':<ref name="caets">http://www.caets.org/nae/naecaets.nsf/(weblinks)/WSAN-78QL9A?OpenDocument</ref> {{quote|As reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), most of the observed global warming since the mid-20th century is very likely due to human-produced emission of greenhouse gases and this warming will continue unabated if present anthropogenic emissions continue or, worse, expand without control. CAETS, therefore, endorses the many recent calls to decrease and control greenhouse gas emissions to an acceptable level as quickly as possible.}} | |||
In 2014, researchers from the ] surveyed 1,868 climate scientists. They found that, consistent with other research, the level of agreement on anthropogenic causation correlated with expertise – 90% of those surveyed with more than 10 peer-reviewed papers related to climate (just under half of survey respondents) explicitly agreed that greenhouse gases were the main cause of global warming.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Verheggen|first1=Bart|last2=Strengers|first2=Bart|last3=Cook|first3=John|last4=van Dorland|first4=Rob|last5=Vringer|first5=Kees|last6=Peters|first6=Jeroen|last7=Visser|first7=Hans|last8=Meyer|first8=Leo|title=Scientists' Views about Attribution of Global Warming|journal=]|date=19 August 2014|volume=48|issue=16|pages=8963–8971|doi=10.1021/es501998e|pmid=25051508|bibcode=2014EnST...48.8963V|doi-access=}}</ref> They included researchers on mitigation and adaptation in their surveys in addition to physical climate scientists, leading to a slightly lower level of consensus compared to previous studies.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Verheggen|first1=Bart|last2=Strengers|first2=Bart|last3=Vringer|first3=Kees|last4=Cook|first4=John|last5=Dorland|first5=Rob van|last6=Peters|first6=Jeroen|last7=Visser|first7=Hans|last8=Meyer|first8=Leo|date=2 December 2014|title=Reply to Comment on "Scientists' Views about Attribution of Global Warming"|journal=Environmental Science & Technology|volume=48|issue=23|pages=14059–14060|doi=10.1021/es505183e|pmid=25405594|issn=0013-936X|bibcode=2014EnST...4814059V|doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
====Physical and chemical sciences==== | |||
=== 2015–2019 === | |||
* ]<ref name="American Chemical Society ''Global Climte Change''"/> | |||
] | |||
* ]<ref name="American Institute of Physics Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate change"/> | |||
A 2016 study titled ''Learning from mistakes in climate research'' followed up on John Cook's 2013 paper by examining the quality of the 3% of peer-reviewed papers which had rejected the consensus view. They discovered that "replication reveals a number of methodological flaws, and a pattern of common mistakes emerges that is not visible when looking at single isolated cases".<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Benestad |first1=Rasmus E. |last2=Nuccitelli |first2=Dana |last3=Lewandowsky |first3=Stephan |last4=Hayhoe |first4=Katharine |last5=Hygen |first5=Hans Olav |last6=van Dorland |first6=Rob |last7=Cook |first7=John |date=November 2016 |title=Learning from mistakes in climate research |journal=Theoretical and Applied Climatology |language=en |volume=126 |issue=3–4 |pages=699–703 |doi=10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5 |bibcode=2016ThApC.126..699B |issn=0177-798X|doi-access=free}}</ref> That same year, Cook's paper was criticized by ],<ref>{{cite journal | last=Tol | first=Richard S J | title=Comment on 'Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature' | journal=Environmental Research Letters | publisher=IOP Publishing | volume=11 | issue=4 | date=1 April 2016 | issn=1748-9326 | doi=10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048001 | page=048001| bibcode=2016ERL....11d8001T | doi-access=free}}</ref> but strongly defended by a companion paper in the same volume.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cook|first1=John|last2=Oreskes|first2=Naomi|last3=Doran|first3=Peter T.|last4=Anderegg|first4=William R. L.|last5=Verheggen|first5=Bart|last6=Maibach|first6=Ed W.|last7=Carlton|first7=J. Stuart|last8=Lewandowsky|first8=Stephan|last9=Skuce|first9=Andrew G.|last10=Green|first10=Sarah A.|last11=Nuccitelli|first11=Dana|date=April 2016|title=Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming|journal=Environmental Research Letters|language=en|volume=11|issue=4|pages=048002|doi=10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002|issn=1748-9326|doi-access=free|bibcode=2016ERL....11d8002C}}</ref> | |||
* ]<ref name="American Physical Society Climate Change Policy Statement"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="AIP science policy document."/> | |||
* ]<ref name="EPS Position Paper ''Energy for the future: The Nuclear Option''"/> | |||
The 5th International Survey of Climate Scientists by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch took place over December 2015 and January 2016. Unlike the past surveys, the scientists were no longer questioned on their opinion of the IPCC, and there was much more focus on ]. In other ways, it had replicated the methodology of the previous surveys, with most responses ranked on a 1-to-7 scale. There were over 600 complete responses: 291 (45.2%) had been working in climate science for over 15 years, while 79 (12.3%) had 0 to 5 years of experience. When asked "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 79.3% said they very much agreed (7), 1.2% were "neutral" (4), and only 2.1% were 1–3 on the scale. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?", 47.7% had very much agreed, 26% agreeing to a large extent (6), 9.8% to a small extent (2–4), and 1.9% did not agree at all (1). 46% had very much agreed that climate change "poses a very serious and dangerous threat to humanity" and 26% agreed to a large extent, while 2.2% did not agree at all. 75.8% said that the level of uncertainty in climate science had decreased since 1996, while 13.6% said it had increased. 75.7% said that the level of risk associated with climate change had increased considerably since 1996, while 5% said it had decreased.<ref>{{cite web |first1=Dennis |last1=Bray |first2=Hans |last2=von Storch |year=2016 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316170360 |title=The Bray and von Storch 5th International Survey of Climate Scientists 2015/2016 |doi=10.13140/RG.2.2.11802.85443}}</ref> | |||
====Earth sciences==== | |||
In 2017, James L. Powell analyzed five surveys of the peer-reviewed literature from 1991 to 2015, and found that they amounted to a combined 54,195 articles, few of which had outright rejected anthropogenic climate change, resulting in an average consensus of 99.94%.<ref name="Powell2017" /> In November 2019, his survey of over 11,600 peer-reviewed articles published in the first seven months of 2019 showed that the consensus had reached 100%.<ref name="Powell2019" /> | |||
=====American Geophysical Union===== | |||
The ] (AGU) statement, adopted by the society in 2003, revised in 2007,<ref name="agu"/> and revised and expanded in 2013,<ref>{{cite web|title=Human-induced Climate Change Requires Urgent Action|url=http://www.agu.org/news/press/pr_archives/2013/2013-38.shtml|work=Position Statement|publisher=American Geophysical Union|accessdate=14 August 2013}}</ref> affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer: | |||
=== 2020s === | |||
{{quote|“Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia. | |||
{{multiple image |total_width=500 | |||
| image1= 20211103 Academic studies of scientific consensus - global warming, climate change - vertical bar chart - en.svg | caption1= ''Scientific consensus on causation:'' Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2015) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cook |first1=John |last2=Oreskes |first2= Naomi |last3=Doran |first3=Peter T. |last4=Anderegg |first4=William R. L. |last5=Verheggen |first5=Bart |display-authors=4 |date=2016 |title=Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming |journal=Environmental Research Letters |volume=11 |issue=4 |page=048002 |bibcode= 2016ERL....11d8002C |doi= 10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002 |doi-access=free}}</ref> A 2019 study found scientific consensus to be at 100%,<ref name="Powell2019" /> and a 2021 study concluded that consensus exceeded 99%.<ref name="EnvRschLtrs_20211019" /> Another 2021 study found that 98.7% of climate experts indicated that the Earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity.<ref name="Myers_2021" /> | |||
While important scientific uncertainties remain as to which particular impacts will be experienced where, no uncertainties are known that could make the impacts of climate change inconsequential. Furthermore, surprise outcomes, such as the unexpectedly rapid loss of Arctic summer sea ice, may entail even more dramatic changes than anticipated."}} | |||
| image2= 20240508 Survey of IPCC lead authors and review editors re expectation of global warming.svg |caption2= In a 2024 survey, 76.3% of responding IPCC lead authors and review editors projected at least 2.5{{nbsp}}°C of global warming by 2100; only 5.79% forecast warming of 1.5{{nbsp}}°C or less.<ref name=Guardian_20240508/> Separately, then-current climate policies indicate the world will have warmed by about 2.7{{nbsp}}°C.<ref name=Guardian_20240508>{{cite news |last1=Carrington |first1=Damian |title=World's top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/08/world-scientists-climate-failure-survey-global-temperature |date=8 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240509191712/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/08/world-scientists-climate-failure-survey-global-temperature |archive-date=9 May 2024 |url-status=live }} Replies were received from 380 of 843 scientists believed to have been contacted.</ref> | |||
}} | |||
=====American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America===== | |||
In 2021, Krista Myers led a paper which surveyed 2780 Earth scientists. Depending on expertise, between 91% (all scientists) to 100% (climate scientists with high levels of expertise, 20+ papers published) agreed human activity is causing climate change. Among the total group of climate scientists, 98.7% agreed. The agreement was lowest among scientists who chose Economic Geology as one of their fields of research (84%).<ref name="Myers_2021" /> | |||
In May, 2011, the ] (ASA), Crop Science Society of America (CSSA), and ] (SSSA) issued a joint position statement on climate change as it relates to agriculture: | |||
{{quote|A comprehensive body of scientific evidence indicates beyond reasonable doubt that global climate change is now occurring and that its manifestations threaten the stability of societies as well as natural and managed ecosystems. Increases in ambient temperatures and changes in related processes are directly linked to rising anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere. | |||
Unless the emissions of GHGs are curbed significantly, their concentrations will continue to rise, leading to changes in temperature, precipitation, and other climate variables that will undoubtedly affect agriculture around the world. | |||
Climate change has the potential to increase weather variability as well as gradually increase global temperatures. Both of these impacts have the potential to negatively impact the adaptability and resilience of the world’s food production capacity; current research indicates climate change is already reducing the productivity of vulnerable cropping systems.<ref name="soils"/>}} | |||
=====European Federation of Geologists===== | |||
In 2008, the European Federation of Geologists<ref name="eurogeologists"/> (EFG) issued the position paper ''Carbon Capture and geological Storage '': | |||
{{quote|The EFG recognizes the work of the IPCC and other organizations, and subscribes to the major findings that climate change is happening, is predominantly caused by anthropogenic emissions of {{CO2}}, and poses a significant threat to human civilization. | |||
It is clear that major efforts are necessary to quickly and strongly reduce {{CO2}} emissions. The EFG strongly advocates renewable and sustainable energy production, including geothermal energy, as well as the need for increasing energy efficiency. | |||
CCS should also be regarded as a bridging technology, facilitating the move towards a carbon free economy.<ref name="eurogeologists9"/>}} | |||
=====European Geosciences Union===== | |||
In 2005, the Divisions of Atmospheric and Climate Sciences of the ] (EGU) issued a position statement in support of the ] on global response to climate change. The statement refers to the ] (IPCC), as "the main representative of the global ]", and asserts that the IPCC | |||
{{quote|represents the state-of-the-art of climate science supported by the major science academies around the world and by the vast majority of science researchers and investigators as documented by the ] scientific literature.<ref name="www"/>}} | |||
Additionally, in 2008, the EGU issued a position statement on ] which states, "Ocean acidification is already occurring today and will continue to intensify, closely tracking ] increase. Given the potential threat to ] and its ensuing impact on human society and economy, especially as it acts in conjunction with ], 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."<ref name="www10"/> | |||
=====Geological Society of America===== | |||
In 2006, the ] adopted a position statement on global ]. It amended this position on April 20, 2010 with more explicit comments on need for {{CO2}} reduction. | |||
{{quote|Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s. If current trends continue, the projected increase in global temperature by the end of the twentyfirst century will result in large impacts on humans and other species. Addressing the challenges posed by climate change will require a combination of adaptation to the changes that are likely to occur and global reductions of {{CO2}} emissions from anthropogenic sources.<ref name="geosociety"/>}} | |||
=====Geological Society of London===== | |||
In November 2010, the ] issued the position statement ''Climate change: evidence from the geological record'': | |||
{{quote|The last century has seen a rapidly growing global population and much more intensive use of resources, leading to greatly increased emissions of gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, from the burning of fossil fuels (oil, gas and coal), and from agriculture, cement production and deforestation. Evidence from the geological record is consistent with the physics that shows that adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere warms the world and may lead to: higher sea levels and flooding of low-lying coasts; greatly changed patterns of rainfall; increased acidity of the oceans; and decreased oxygen levels in seawater. | |||
There is now widespread concern that the Earth’s climate will warm further, not only because of the lingering effects of the added carbon already in the system, but also because of further additions as human population continues to grow. Life on Earth has survived large climate changes in the past, but extinctions and major redistribution of species have been associated with many of them. When the human population was small and nomadic, a rise in sea level of a few metres would have had very little effect on Homo sapiens. With the current and growing global population, much of which is concentrated in coastal cities, such a rise in sea level would have a drastic effect on our complex society, especially if the climate were to change as suddenly as it has at times in the past. Equally, it seems likely that as warming continues some areas may experience less precipitation leading to drought. With both rising seas and increasing drought, pressure for human migration could result on a large scale.<ref name="geolsoc"/>}} | |||
=====International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics===== | |||
In July 2007, the ] (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 gases, which will, in turn, cause significant increases in surface temperature, sea level, ocean acidification, and their related consequences to the environment and society.”<ref name="iugg"/> | |||
=====National Association of Geoscience Teachers===== | |||
In July 2009, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers<ref name="nagt"/> (NAGT) adopted a position statement on climate change in which they assert that "Earth's climate is changing "that present warming trends are largely the result of human activities": | |||
{{quote|NAGT strongly supports and will work to promote education in the science of climate change, the causes and effects of current global warming, and the immediate need for policies and actions that reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.<ref name="nagt11"/>}} | |||
====Meteorology and oceanography==== | |||
=====American Meteorological Society===== | |||
The ] (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2012 concluded: | |||
{{quote|There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research. The observed warming will be irreversible for many years into the future, and even larger temperature increases will occur as greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere. Avoiding this future warming will require a large and rapid reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions. The ongoing warming will increase risks and stresses to human societies, economies, ecosystems, and wildlife through the 21st century and beyond, making it imperative that society respond to a changing climate. To inform decisions on adaptation and mitigation, it is critical that we improve our understanding of the global climate system and our ability to project future climate through continued and improved monitoring and research. This is especially true for smaller (seasonal and regional) scales and weather and climate extremes, and for important hydroclimatic variables such as precipitation and water availability. | |||
Technological, economic, and policy choices in the near future will determine the extent of future impacts of climate change. Science-based decisions are seldom made in a context of absolute certainty. National and international policy discussions should include consideration of the best ways to both adapt to and mitigate climate change. Mitigation will reduce the amount of future climate change and the risk of impacts that are potentially large and dangerous. At the same time, some continued climate change is inevitable, and policy responses should include adaptation to climate change. Prudence dictates extreme care in accounting for our relationship with the only planet known to be capable of sustaining human life.<ref name="ametsoc"/>}} | |||
=====Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society===== | |||
The ] has issued a ''Statement on Climate Change'', wherein they conclude: | |||
{{quote|Global climate change and global warming are real and observable ... It is highly likely that those human activities that have increased the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have been largely responsible for the observed warming since 1950. The warming associated with increases in greenhouse gases originating from human activity is called the enhanced ]. The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by more than 30% since the start of the industrial age and is higher now than at any time in at least the past 650,000 years. This increase is a direct result of burning fossil fuels, broad-scale ] and other human activity.”<ref name="amos"/>}} | |||
=====Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences===== | |||
In November 2005, the ] (CFCAS) issued a letter to the ] stating that | |||
{{quote|We concur with the climate science assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001 ... We endorse the conclusions of the IPCC assessment that 'There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities'. ... There is increasingly unambiguous evidence of changing climate in Canada and around the world. There will be increasing impacts of climate change on Canada’s natural ecosystems and on our socio-economic activities. Advances in climate science since the 2001 IPCC Assessment have provided more evidence supporting the need for action and development of a strategy for adaptation to projected changes.<ref name="cfcas"/>}} | |||
=====Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society===== | |||
In November 2009, a letter to the Canadian Parliament by The ] states: | |||
{{quote|Rigorous international research, including work carried out and supported by the Government of Canada, reveals that greenhouse gases resulting from human activities contribute to the warming of the atmosphere and the oceans and constitute a serious risk to the health and safety of our society, as well as having an impact on all life.<ref name="cmos"/>}} | |||
=====Royal Meteorological Society (UK)===== | |||
In February 2007, after the release of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, the ] 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.”<ref name="rmets"/> | |||
=====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 ] (WMO) confirms the need to “].” 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.” | |||
<ref name="www12"></ref> | |||
====Paleoclimatology==== | |||
] | |||
=====American Quaternary Association===== | |||
The ] (AMQUA) has stated | |||
{{quote|Few credible Scientists now doubt that humans have influenced the documented rise of global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution,” citing “the growing body of evidence that warming of the atmosphere, especially over the past 50 years, is directly impacted by human activity.<ref name="agu13"/>}} | |||
=====International Union for Quaternary Research===== | |||
The statement on climate change issued by the ] (INQUA) reiterates the conclusions of the IPCC, and urges all nations to take prompt action in line with the ] principles. | |||
{{quote|Human activities are now causing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases — including carbon dioxide, methane, tropospheric ozone, and nitrous oxide — to rise well above pre-industrial levels….Increases in greenhouse gases are causing temperatures to rise…The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action….Minimizing the amount of this carbon dioxide reaching the atmosphere presents a huge challenge but must be a global priority.<ref name="inqua"/>}} | |||
====Biology and life sciences==== | |||
Life science organizations have outlined the dangers climate change pose to wildlife. | |||
* American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians<ref name="AAWV ''Position Statement on Climate Change, Wildlife Diseases, and Wildlife Health''"/> | |||
* ]. In October 2009, the leaders of 18 US scientific societies and organizations sent an open letter to the ] reaffirming the scientific consensus that climate change is occurring and is primarily caused by human activities. The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) adopted this letter as their official position statement.<ref name="AIBS Position Statements"/><ref name="''Scientific societies warn Senate: climate change is real''"/> The letter goes on to warn of predicted impacts on the United States such as ] and increases in ], ], ], ], and the disturbance of ]. It then advocates for a dramatic reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases.<ref name="Letter to US Senators"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="Global Environmental Change — Microbial Contributions, Microbial Solutions"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="Australian Coral Reef Society official letter"/> | |||
* ] (UK)<ref name="iob"/> | |||
* ] issued two position statements pertaining to climate change in which they cite the IPCC<ref name="SAF ''Forest Management and Climate Change ''"/> and the UNFCCC.<ref name="SAF ''Forest Offset Projects in a Carbon Trading System''"/> | |||
* ] (international)<ref name="Wildlife Society ''Global Climate Change and Wildlife''"/> | |||
====Human health==== | |||
A number of health organizations have warned about the numerous ] | |||
* ]<ref name="AAP ''Global Climate Change and Children's Health''"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="ACPM Policy Statement ''Abrupt Climate Change and Public Health Implications''"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="American Medical Association Policy Statement"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="apha"/> | |||
* ] in 2004<ref name="AMA ''Climate Change and Human Health — 2004''"/> and in 2008<ref name="AMA ''Climate Change and Human Health'' — 2004. Revised 2008."/> | |||
* World Federation of Public Health Associations<ref name="wfpha"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="WHO ''Protecting health from climate change''"/> | |||
{{quote|There is now widespread agreement that the Earth is warming, due to emissions of greenhouse gases caused by human activity. It is also clear that current trends in energy use, development, and population growth will lead to continuing – and more severe – climate change.}} | |||
{{quote|The changing climate will inevitably affect the basic requirements for maintaining health: clean air and water, sufficient food and adequate shelter. Each year, about 800,000 people die from causes attributable to ], 1.8 million from ] resulting from lack of access to clean water supply, sanitation, and poor hygiene, 3.5 million from ] and approximately 60,000 in natural disasters. A warmer and more variable climate threatens to lead to higher levels of some air pollutants, increase transmission of diseases through unclean water and through contaminated food, to compromise agricultural production in some of the least developed countries, and increase the hazards of extreme weather.}} | |||
====Miscellaneous==== | |||
A number of other national scientific societies have also endorsed the opinion of the IPCC: | |||
* ]<ref name="Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate change"/> | |||
* ]<ref name="ASA Statement on Climate Change"/> | |||
* The Institution of ]<ref name="Policy Statement, Climate Change and Energy"/> | |||
* International Association for Great Lakes Research<ref name="IAGLR Fact Sheet ''The Great Lakes at a Crossroads: Preparing for a Changing Climate''"/> | |||
* Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand<ref name="IPENZ Informatory Note, ''Climate Change and the greenhouse effect''"/> | |||
* | |||
===Non-committal=== | |||
{{anchor|Non-committal statements}} | |||
====American Association of Petroleum Geologists==== | |||
As of June 2007, the ] (AAPG) Position Statement on climate change stated: | |||
{{quote|the AAPG membership is divided on the degree of influence that anthropogenic {{CO2}} has on recent and potential global temperature increases ... Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through NAS, AGU, AAAS and AMS. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum case scenarios forecast in some models.<ref name="aapg"/>}} | |||
Prior to the adoption of this statement, 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.<ref name="AQAonAAPG"/> Explaining the plan for a revision, AAPG president Lee Billingsly wrote in March 2007: | |||
{{quote|Members have threatened to not renew their memberships… if AAPG does not alter its position on global climate change... And I have been told of members who already have resigned in previous years because of our current global climate change position… The current policy statement is not supported by a significant number of our members and prospective members.<ref name="aapg14"/>}} | |||
AAPG President John Lorenz announced the "sunsetting" of AAPG’s Global Climate Change Committee in January 2010. The AAPG Executive Committee determined: | |||
{{bquote|Climate change is peripheral at best to our science AAPG does not have credibility in that field and as a group we have no particular knowledge of global atmospheric geophysics.<ref name="2010_tpgmarapr"/>}} | |||
====American Institute of Professional Geologists==== | |||
In 2009, the American Institute of Professional Geologists<ref name="aipg"/> (AIPG) sent a statement to President ] and other US government officials: | |||
{{quote|The geological professionals in AIPG recognize that climate change is occurring and has the potential to yield catastrophic impacts if humanity is not prepared to address those impacts. It is also recognized that climate change will occur regardless of the cause. The sooner a defensible scientific understanding can be developed, the better equipped humanity will be to develop economically viable and technically effective methods to support the needs of society.<ref name="aipg16"/>}} | |||
Concerned that the original statement issued in March 2009 was too ambiguous, AIPG’s National Executive Committee approved a revised position statement issued in January 2010: | |||
{{bquote|The geological professionals in AIPG recognize that climate change is occurring regardless of cause. AIPG supports continued research into all forces driving climate change.<ref name="2010_tpgjanfeb"/>}} | |||
In March 2010, AIPG’s Executive Director issued a statement regarding polarization of opinions on climate change within the membership and announced that the AIPG Executive had made a decision to cease publication of articles and opinion pieces concerning climate change in AIPG’s news journal, ''The Professional Geologist''.<ref name="aipg17"/> The Executive Director said that “the question of anthropogenicity of climate change is contentious.”<ref name="2010_tpgmarapr18"/> | |||
====Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences==== | |||
{{quote|The science of global climate change is still evolving and our understanding of this vital Earth system is not as developed as is the case for other Earth systems such as plate tectonics. What is known with certainty is that regardless of the causes, our global climate will continue to change for the foreseeable future... The level of {{CO2}} in our atmosphere is now greater than at any time in the past 500,000 years; there will be consequences for our global climate and natural systems as a result.<ref name="geoscience"/>}} | |||
====Geological Society of Australia==== | |||
{{quote|After a long and extensive and extended consultation with society members, the GSA executive committee has decided not to proceed with a climate change position statement.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/earth-scientists-split-on-climate-change-statement/story-e6frg8y6-1226942126322?sv=be1dcfaa02d4346ce0ed662fdf01ddeb# |title= Earth scientists split on climate change statement |work= ] |date= June 4, 2014 |accessdate= June 4, 2014 |author= Graham Lloyd}}{{subscription required|date= June 2014}}</ref>}} | |||
===Dissenting=== | |||
{{See also|List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming}} | |||
As of 2007, when the ] released a revised statement,<ref name="aapg19"/> no scientific body of national or international standing rejected the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.<ref name=AQAonAAPG/><ref name=Oreskes07p68/> | |||
==Surveys of scientists and scientific literature== | |||
] | |||
</ref><ref name="Cook2013">{{cite journal |author= John Cook, Dana Nuccitelli, Sarah A Green, Mark Richardson, Bärbel Winkler, Rob Painting, Robert Way, Peter Jacobs. Andrew Skuce |date=15 May 2013 |title=Expert credibility in climate change |volume= 8 |journal=Environ. Res. Lett. |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024 |bibcode = 2013ERL.....8b4024C |issue= 2 |pages= 024024 |ref= harv }}</ref>]] | |||
{{Main|Surveys of scientists' views on climate change}} | |||
Various surveys have been conducted to evaluate scientific opinion on ]. They have concluded that the majority of scientists support the idea of anthropogenic climate change. | |||
In 2004, the geologist and historian of science ] summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.<ref name="Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change"/> She analyzed 928 ] of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003 and concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of ]. | |||
Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, ] analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Seventy-five per cent of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories (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." | |||
In 2007, ] surveyed 489 randomly selected members of either the ] or the ] for the ] (STATS) at ]. 97% of the scientists surveyed agreed that global temperatures had increased during the past 100 years; 84% said they personally believed human-induced warming was occurring, and 74% agreed that "currently available scientific evidence" substantiated its occurrence. Catastrophic effects in 50–100 years would likely be observed according to 41%, while 44% thought the effects would be moderate and about 13 percent saw relatively little danger. 5% said they thought human activity did not contribute to greenhouse warming.<ref name="Survey Tracks Scientists' Growing Climate Concern"/><ref name="Climate Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Don't Trust the Media's Coverage of Climate Change">{{cite web |last=Lichter |first=S. Robert |url=http://stats.org/stories/2008/global_warming_survey_apr23_08.html |title=Climate Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Don't Trust the Media's Coverage of Climate Change|publisher=Statistical Assessment Service, George Mason University |date=2008-04-24 |accessdate=2010-01-20}}</ref><ref name="journalistsresource"/><ref name="The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change"/> | |||
Dennis Bray and ] conducted a survey in August 2008 of 2058 climate scientists from 34 different countries.<ref name="A Survey of the Perspectives of Climate Scientists Concerning Climate Science and Climate Change"/> A web link with a unique identifier was given to each respondent to eliminate multiple responses. A total of 373 responses were received giving an overall response rate of 18.2%. No paper on climate change consensus based on this survey has been published yet (February 2010), but one on another subject has been published based on the survey.<ref name="Prediction' or 'Projection; The nomenclature of climate science"/> | |||
The survey was composed of 76 questions split into a number of sections. | |||
There were sections on the demographics of the respondents, their assessment of the state of climate science, how good the science is, climate change impacts, adaptation and mitigation, their opinion of the IPCC, and how well climate science was being communicated to the public. | |||
Most of the answers were on a scale from 1 to 7 from 'not at all' to 'very much'. | |||
To the question "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 67.1% said they very much agreed, 26.7% agreed to some large extent, 6.2% said to they agreed to some small extent (2–4), none said they did not agree at all. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will | |||
be, a result of anthropogenic causes?" the responses were 34.6% very much agree, 48.9% agreeing to a large extent, 15.1% to a small extent, and 1.35% not agreeing at all. | |||
A poll performed by ] and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at ] received replies from 3,146 of the 10,257 polled Earth scientists. Results were analyzed globally and by specialization. 76 out of 79 ] 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" believed that mean global temperatures had risen compared to pre-1800s levels. Seventy-five of 77 believed 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. ]s and ]s were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in significant human involvement. The authors summarised the findings: | |||
{{quote|It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes.<ref name="DZ_EOS_2009"/>}} | |||
A 2010 paper in the ] (PNAS) reviewed publication and citation data for 1,372 climate researchers and drew the following two conclusions: | |||
<blockquote>(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.<ref name="Expert credibility in climate change"/></blockquote> | |||
A 2013 paper in ] reviewed 11,944 abstracts of scientific papers matching "global warming" or "global climate change". They found 4,014 which discussed the cause of recent global warming, and of these 97.1% endorsed the consensus position.<ref name="Cook_etal_13"/> | |||
], a former member of the ] and current executive director of the ], analyzed published research on global warming and climate change between 1991 and 2012 and found that of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 rejected anthropogenic global warming.<ref>{{cite news|last=Plait|first=P.|date=11 December 2012|title=Why Climate Change Denial Is Just Hot Air|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/11/climate_change_denial_why_don_t_they_publish_scientific_papers.html|newspaper=Slate|accessdate=14 February 2014}}</ref> A follow-up analysis looking at 2,258 peer-reviewed climate articles with 9,136 authors published between November 2012 and December 2013 revealed that only one of the 9,136 authors rejected anthropogenic global warming.<ref>{{cite news|last=Plait|first=P.|date=14 January 2014|title=The Very, Very Thin Wedge of Denial|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/01/14/climate_change_another_study_shows_they_don_t_publish_actual_papers.html|newspaper=Slate|accessdate=14 February 2014}}</ref> | |||
Also in 2021, a team led by Mark Lynas had found 80,000 climate-related studies published between 2012 and 2020, and chose to analyse a random subset of 3000. Four of these were skeptical of the human cause of climate change, 845 were endorsing the human cause perspective at different levels, and 1869 were indifferent to the question. The authors estimated the proportion of papers not skeptical of the human cause as 99.85% (95% confidence limit 99.62%–99.96%). Excluding papers which took no position on the human cause led to an estimate of the proportion of consensus papers as 99.53% (95% confidence limit 98.80%–99.87%). They confirmed their numbers by explicitly looking for alternative hypotheses in the entire dataset, which resulted in 28 papers.<ref name="EnvRschLtrs_20211019" /><ref>{{cite web |last1=Ramanujan |first1=Krishna |title=More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change |url=https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/10/more-999-studies-agree-humans-caused-climate-change |website=Cornell Chronicle |publisher=Environmental Research Letters |access-date=20 October 2021}}</ref> | |||
==Scientific consensus== | |||
{{See also|Scientific consensus}} | |||
A question that frequently arises in popular discussion of climate change is whether there is a scientific consensus on climate change.<ref name="Oreskes_consensus"/> Several scientific organizations have explicitly used the term "consensus" in their statements: | |||
* ], 2006: "The conclusions in this statement reflect the scientific consensus represented by, for example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the Joint National Academies' statement."<ref name="aaas board"/> | |||
* ]: "In the judgment of most climate scientists, Earth’s warming in recent decades has been caused primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. ... On climate change, have assessed consensus findings on the science..."<ref name="nas"/> | |||
* Joint Science Academies' statement, 2005: "We recognise the international scientific consensus of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."<ref name="nationalacademies21"/> | |||
* Joint Science Academies' statement, 2001: "The work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the consensus of the international scientific community on climate change science. We recognise IPCC as the world’s most reliable source of information on climate change and its causes, and we endorse its method of achieving this consensus."<ref name="The Science of Climate Change"/> | |||
* ], 2003: "The nature of science is such that there is rarely total agreement among scientists. Individual scientific statements and papers—the validity of some of which has yet to be assessed adequately—can be exploited in the policy debate and can leave the impression that the scientific community is sharply divided on issues where there is, in reality, a strong scientific consensus.... IPCC assessment reports are prepared at approximately five-year intervals by a large international group of experts who represent the broad range of expertise and perspectives relevant to the issues. The reports strive to reflect a consensus evaluation of the results of the full body of peer-reviewed research.... They provide an analysis of what is known and not known, the degree of consensus, and some indication of the degree of confidence that can be placed on the various statements and conclusions."<ref name="ametsoc22"/> | |||
* ]: “A consensus, based on current evidence, now exists within the global scientific community that human activities are the main source of climate change and that the burning of fossil fuels is largely responsible for driving this change.”<ref name="autogenerated1" /> | |||
* ], 2008: "INQUA recognizes the international scientific consensus of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."<ref name="inqua"/> | |||
* Australian Coral Reef Society,<ref name="australiancoralreefsociety"/> 2006: "There is almost total consensus among experts that the earth’s climate is changing as a result of the build-up of greenhouse gases.... There is broad scientific consensus that coral reefs are heavily affected by the activities of man and there are significant global influences that can make reefs more vulnerable such as global warming...."<ref name="australiancoralreefsociety24"/> | |||
==See also== | == See also == | ||
{{Portal| |
{{Portal|Climate change|Energy}} | ||
{{wikiquote}} | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | * ] | ||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | * ] | ||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | * ] | ||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
{{clear}} | |||
* ] survey on climate change | |||
* ] | |||
==References== | == References == | ||
{{reflist |
{{reflist|refs= | ||
<ref name="amap">{{cite web |url=http://amap.no/acia/ |title=ACIA Display |publisher=Amap.no |access-date=30 July 2012 |archive-date=14 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101214135239/http://amap.no/acia/ |url-status=dead}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly">{{cite web |url=http://www.grida.no/polar/news/2427.aspx |title=Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly|publisher=UNEP/GRID-Arendal|date=8 November 2004|access-date=20 January 2010}}</ref> | |||
<ref name = "AmericasClimateChoices-2010-SciPanel"> {{Cite book | publisher=The National Academies Press | isbn = 0-309-14588-0 | last = America's Climate Choices: Panel on Advancing the Science of Climate Change; National Research Council | title = Advancing the Science of Climate Change | location = Washington, D.C. | year = 2010 | url = http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12782 | quote = (p1) ... there is a strong, credible body of evidence, based on multiple lines of research, documenting that climate is changing and that these changes are in large part caused by human activities. While much remains to be learned, the core phenomenon, scientific questions, and hypotheses have been examined thoroughly and have stood firm in the face of serious scientific debate and careful evaluation of alternative explanations. * * * (p21-22) Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested, and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small. Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts. This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities. }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="inqua">{{cite web|url=http://www.inqua.org/files/iscc.pdf|title=INQUA Statement On Climate Change.}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="Integration and Synthesis: Assessing Climate Change Impacts in Northern Canada">{{cite journal |author=Ogden, Aynslie and Cohen, Stewart |title=''Integration and Synthesis: Assessing Climate Change Impacts in Northern Canada'' |year=2002 |url=http://www.taiga.net/nce/initiatives/publications/occasional_paper_02.pdf |format=PDF |accessdate=2009-04-12 }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="NASAC2007">{{cite web | url=http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=4825 | title=Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC) to the G8 on sustainability, energy efficiency and climate change | year=2007 | access-date=28 August 2012 | publisher=Network of African Science Academies | format=PDF | archive-date=9 June 2017 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170609114053/http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=4825 | url-status=dead}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="''Scientific societies warn Senate: climate change is real''">{{citation |url=http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/scientific-societies-warn-senate-climate-change-is-real.ars |title=''Scientific societies warn Senate: climate change is real'' | publisher=Ars Technica |date=October 22, 2009}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="nationalacademies21">{{cite web|url=http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf|title=Joint Science Academies' Statement|access-date=2006-08-30|archive-date=2013-09-09|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130909022954/http://www.nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> | |||
<ref name = "Cook_etal_13">{{cite journal |author=Cook, J.; Nuccitelli, D.; Green, S.A.; Richardson, M.; Winkler, B.; Painting, R.; Way, R.; Jacobs, P.; Skuc, A. |title=Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature |year=2013 |journal= Environ. Res. Lett. |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=024024 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024 |bibcode = 2013ERL.....8b4024C }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="Oreskes_consensus">{{cite book |title=Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren |editor1-last=DiMento |editor1-first=Joseph F. C. |editor2-last=Doughman |editor2-first=Pamela M. |year=2007 |publisher=MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-54193-0 |pages=65–66 |chapter=The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We're Not Wrong? |last=Oreskes |first=Naomi |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PXJIqCkb7YIC&pg=PA65 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PXJIqCkb7YIC}}</ref> | |||
<!--ref name="2009_tpgnovdec">, ''The Professional Geologist'', November/December 2009, p. 14-15</ref--> | |||
<ref name="The Science of Climate Change">{{cite journal |date=18 May 2001 |title=The Science of Climate Change |journal=Science |volume=292 |issue=5520 |page=1261 |url=https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.292.5520.1261 |publisher=Science Magazine|doi=10.1126/science.292.5520.1261 |pmid=11360966 |author1=Australian Academy of Science |author2=Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts |author3=Brazilian Academy of Sciences |author4=Royal Society of Canada |author5=Caribbean Academy of Sciences |author6=Chinese Academy of Sciences |author7=French Academy of Sciences |author8=German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina |author9=Indian National Science Academy |author10=Indonesian Academy of Sciences |author11=Royal Irish Academy |author12=Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy) |author13=Academy of Sciences Malaysia |author14=Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand |author15=Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences |author16=Turkish Academy of Sciences |author17=Royal Society (UK) }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="aaas board"> ''www.aaas.org'' December 2006</ref> | |||
<ref name="The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change">{{cite web |url= http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/10/27/ijpor.edr033.short|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130311113824/http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/10/27/ijpor.edr033.short|url-status= dead|archive-date= 11 March 2013|title= The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change|author1=Stephen J. Farnsworth |author2=S. Robert Lichter |date= 27 October 2011|publisher= International Journal of Public Opinion Research |access-date= 2 December 2011}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="2010_tpgmarapr">, ''The Professional Geologist'', March/April 2010, p. 28</ref> | |||
<ref name="Myers_2021">{{cite journal |last1=Myers |first1=Krista F. |last2= Doran |first2=Peter T. |last3=Cook |first3=John |last4=Kotcher |first4=John E. |last5=Myers |first5=Teresa A. |title=Consensus revisited: quantifying scientific agreement on climate change and climate expertise among Earth scientists 10 years later |journal= Environmental Research Letters |date=20 October 2021 |volume=16 |issue=10 |page=104030 |doi= 10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774 |bibcode= 2021ERL....16j4030M |s2cid= 239047650 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="2010_tpgjanfeb">, ''The Professional Geologist'', January/February 2010, p. 42</ref> | |||
<ref name="EnvRschLtrs_20211019">{{cite journal |last1=Lynas |first1=Mark |last2=Houlton |first2=Benjamin Z. |last3=Perry |first3=Simon |title=Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature |journal=Environmental Research Letters |date=19 October 2021 |volume=16 |issue=11 |page= 114005 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966 |bibcode= 2021ERL....16k4005L |s2cid= 239032360 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="2010_tpgmarapr18">, ''The Professional Geologist'', March/April 2010, p. 33</ref> | |||
<ref name="4thNationalClimateAssessment_20181123">{{cite journal |title=Climate Science Special Report / Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4), Volume I /Executive Summary / Highlights of the Findings of the U.S. Global Change Research Program Climate Science Special Report |url=https://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/executive-summary/ |website=globalchange.gov |publisher=U.S. Global Change Research Program |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190614150544/https://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/executive-summary/ |archive-date=14 June 2019 |date=23 November 2018 |doi=10.7930/J0DJ5CTG |url-status=live |last1=Wuebbles |first1=D.J. |last2=Fahey |first2=D.W. |last3=Hibbard |first3=K.A. |last4=Deangelo |first4=B. |last5=Doherty |first5=S. |last6=Hayhoe |first6=K. |last7=Horton |first7=R. |last8=Kossin |first8=J.P. |last9=Taylor |first9=P.C. |last10=Waple |first10=A.M. |last11=Yohe |first11=C.P. |pages=1–470 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="A Survey of the Perspectives of Climate Scientists Concerning Climate Science and Climate Change">{{cite web |first1=Dennis |last1=Bray |first2=Hans |last2=von Storch |year=2009 |url=http://coast.gkss.de/staff/storch/pdf/CliSci2008.pdf |title=A Survey of the Perspectives of Climate Scientists Concerning Climate Science and Climate Change }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="NDU1978">{{cite report |title=Climate Change to the Year 2000: A Survey of Expert Opinion |url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED160394.pdf |date=February 1978}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="AAP ''Global Climate Change and Children's Health''">{{citation |url=http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;120/5/1149 |title=AAP ''Global Climate Change and Children's Health'' |year=2007}} "There is broad scientific consensus that Earth's climate is warming rapidly and at an accelerating rate. Human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels, are very likely (>90% probability) to be the main cause of this warming. Climate-sensitive changes in ecosystems are already being observed, and fundamental, potentially irreversible, ecological changes may occur in the coming decades. Conservative environmental estimates of the impact of climate changes that are already in process indicate that they will result in numerous health effects to children. Anticipated direct health consequences of climate change include injury and death from ] and ], increases in climate-sensitive ], increases in ], and more heat-related, potentially fatal, illness. Within all of these categories, children have increased vulnerability compared with other groups."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Stewart1992">{{cite report |last1=Stewart |first1=Thomas R. |last2=Mumpower |first2=Jeryl L. |last3=Reagan-Cirincione |first3=Patricia |url=https://www.albany.edu/cpr/stewart/Papers/StewartClimateSurvey-1992.pdf |title=Scientists' Agreement and Disagreement about Global Climate Change: Evidence from Surveys |date=April 1992}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="aapg"> from dpa.aapg.org</ref> | |||
<ref name="BrayvonStorch1999">{{cite journal |last=Bray |first=Dennis |author2=Hans von Storch |author2-link=Hans von Storch |title=Climate Science: An Empirical Example of Postnormal Science |journal=Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society |year=1999 |url=https://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/envirophilo/postnormal.pdf |volume=80 |issue=3 |pages=439–455 |issn=1520-0477 |doi=10.1175/1520-0477(1999)080<0439:CSAEEO>2.0.CO;2 |bibcode=1999BAMS...80..439B |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="aapg14">{{cite web|url=http://www.aapg.org/explorer/president/2007/03mar.cfm |title=Climate :03:2007 EXPLORER |publisher=Aapg.org |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="BrayvonStorch2003">{{cite journal |last1=Bray|first1=Dennis|last2=Storch|first2=Hans von |title=Climate Scientists' Perceptions of Climate Change Science.|journal=GKSS Report 11/2007|url=https://www.hereon.de/imperia/md/content/hzg/zentrale_einrichtungen/bibliothek/berichte/gkss_berichte_2007/gkss_2007_11.pdf}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="aapg19"></ref> | |||
<ref name="John Cook 2013">{{cite journal|last=Cook|first=John |author2=Dana Nuccitelli |author3=Sarah A Green |author4=Mark Richardson |author5=Bärbel Winkler |author6=Rob Painting |author7=Robert Way |author8=Peter Jacobs |author9=Andrew Skuce|title=Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature|journal=Environmental Research Letters|date=May 2013|volume=8|issue=2|pages=024024 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024 |author-link=John Cook (Australian scientist)|bibcode = 2013ERL.....8b4024C |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="AAWV ''Position Statement on Climate Change, Wildlife Diseases, and Wildlife Health''">{{citation |url=http://google.com/search?q=cache:IeEiaoU5hZAJ:www.aawv.net/AAWVPositionClimateChangeFinal.doc+AAWV+Position+Statements+wildlife+diseases+and+wildlife+health&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=AAWV ''Position Statement on Climate Change, Wildlife Diseases, and Wildlife Health''}} "There is widespread scientific agreement that the world’s climate is changing and that the weight of evidence demonstrates that ] factors have and will continue to contribute significantly to global warming and climate change. It is anticipated that continuing changes to the climate will have serious negative impacts on public, animal and ecosystem health due to ] events, changing ] dynamics, emerging and re-emerging ], and alterations to ] and ecological systems that are essential to ]. Furthermore, there is increasing recognition of the inter-relationships of human, ], wildlife, and ecosystem health as illustrated by the fact the majority of recent emerging diseases have a wildlife origin."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Powell2017">{{Cite journal|last=Powell|first=James Lawrence|author-link=James L. Powell|date=24 May 2017|title=The Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming Matters|journal=Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society|language=en|volume=36|issue=3|pages=157–163|doi=10.1177/0270467617707079|s2cid=148618842}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="ACPM Policy Statement ''Abrupt Climate Change and Public Health Implications''">{{citation |url=http://www.acpm.org/2006-002(C).htm |title=ACPM Policy Statement ''Abrupt Climate Change and Public Health Implications'' |year=2006}} "The American College of Preventive Medicine (ACPM) accept the position that global warming and climate change is occurring, that there is potential for abrupt climate change, and that human practices that increase greenhouse gases exacerbate the problem, and that the ] consequences may be severe."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Powell2019">{{cite journal |last1=Powell |first1=James Lawrence |author-link=James L. Powell |date=20 November 2019 |title= Scientists Reach 100% Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0270467619886266 |journal=Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society |volume=37 |issue=4 |pages= 183–184 |doi= 10.1177/0270467619886266 |s2cid= 213454806 |access-date=15 November 2020}}</ref> | |||
<!--ref name="agiweb">{{cite web|url=http://www.agiweb.org/gapac/climate_statement.html |title=AGI Statement on Global Climate Change |publisher=Agiweb.org |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref--> | |||
<ref name="IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM">IPCC, 2021: . In: . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York City, US, pp. 3–32, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.001.</ref> | |||
<ref name="agu">{{cite web|url=http://www.agu.org/sci_pol/positions/climate_change2008.shtml |title=AGU Position Statement: Human Impacts on Climate |publisher=Agu.org |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="NCAR5_Ch2">Marvel, K., W. Su, R. Delgado, S. Aarons, A. Chatterjee, M.E. Garcia, Z. Hausfather, K. Hayhoe, D.A. Hence, | |||
<ref name="agu13"></ref> | |||
E.B. Jewett, A. Robel, D. Singh, A. Tripati, and R.S. Vose, 2023: . In: . Crimmins, A.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock, Eds. U.S. | |||
Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA. doi:10.7930/NCA5.2023.CH2</ref> | |||
<ref name="AIP science policy document.">{{citation |url=http://www.aip.org.au/scipolicy/Science%20Policy.pdf |title=AIP science policy document. |year=2005}} "Policy: The AIP supports a reduction of the green house gas emissions that are leading to increased global temperatures, and encourages research that works towards this goal. Reason: Research in Australia and overseas shows that an increase in global temperature will adversely affect the Earth’s climate patterns. The melting of the polar ice caps, combined with thermal expansion, will lead to rises in sea levels that may impact adversely on our coastal cities. The impact of these changes on ] will fundamentally change the ] of Earth."</ref> | |||
<ref name="AIBS Position Statements">{{citation |url=http://www.aibs.org/position-statements |title=AIBS Position Statements}} "Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver."</ref> | |||
<ref name="aipg">{{cite web |title=American Geological Institute Climate Statement |url=http://www.agiweb.org/gapac/climate_statement.html |date=12 Feb 1999 |accessdate=July 2012 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20120720095530/http://www.agiweb.org/gapac/climate_statement.html |archivedate=July 2012}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="aipg16"></ref> | |||
<ref name="AMA ''Climate Change and Human Health — 2004''">{{citation |url=https://fed.ama.com.au/cms/web.nsf/doc/WOOD-5ZD6BT |title=AMA ''Climate Change and Human Health — 2004'' |year=2004}} 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."</ref> | |||
<ref name="aipg17">{{cite web |title=The Professional Geologist publications |url=http://www.aipg.org/Publications/TPGPublic.html |accessdate=July 2012 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20120305085445/http://www.aipg.org/Publications/TPGPublic.html |archivedate=July 2012}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="amap">{{cite web|url=http://amap.no/acia/ |title=ACIA Display |publisher=Amap.no |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="AMA ''Climate Change and Human Health'' — 2004. Revised 2008.">{{citation |url=http://www.ama.com.au/node/4442 |title=AMA ''Climate Change and Human Health'' — 2004. Revised 2008. |year=2008}} "The world’s climate – our life-support system – is being altered in ways that are likely to pose significant direct and indirect challenges to health. While ‘climate change’ can be due to natural forces or human activity, there is now substantial evidence to indicate that human activity – and specifically increased greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions – is a key factor in the pace and extent of global temperature increases. Health impacts of climate change include the direct impacts of extreme events such as storms, floods, ] and fires and the indirect effects of longer-term changes, such as drought, changes to the ] and ], resource conflicts and population shifts. Increases in average temperatures mean that alterations in the geographic range and seasonality of certain infections and diseases (including vector-borne diseases such as ], ], ] and food-borne infections such as ]) may be among the first detectable impacts of climate change on human health. Human health is ultimately dependent on the health of the planet and its ecosystem. The AMA believes that measures which mitigate climate change will also benefit public health. Reducing GHGs should therefore be seen as a public health priority."</ref> | |||
<ref name="American Chemical Society ''Global Climte Change''">{{citation |url=http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_SUPERARTICLE&node_id=1907&use_sec=false&sec_url_var=region1&__uuid=0cbd57b5-5766-456d-800b-680b88c1c8bf |title=American Chemical Society ''Global Climte Change'' }} "Careful and comprehensive scientific assessments have clearly demonstrated that the Earth’s climate system is changing rapidly in response to growing atmospheric burdens of greenhouse gases and absorbing aerosol particles (IPCC, 2007). There is very little room for doubt that observed climate trends are due to human activities. The threats are serious and action is urgently needed to mitigate the risks of climate change. The reality of global warming, its current serious and potentially disastrous impacts on Earth system properties, and the key role emissions from human activities play in driving these phenomena have been recognized by earlier versions of this ACS policy statement (ACS, 2004), by other major scientific societies, including the American Geophysical Union (AGU, 2003), the American Meteorological Society (AMS, 2007) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS, 2007), and by the U. S. National Academies and ten other leading national academies of science (NA, 2005)."</ref> | |||
<ref name="American Institute of Physics Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate change">{{citation |url=http://www.aip.org/fyi/2004/042.html |title=American Institute of Physics Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate change |year=2003}} "The Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics has endorsed a position statement on climate change adopted by the American Geophysical Union (AGU) Council in December 2003."</ref> | |||
<ref name="American Physical Society Climate Change Policy Statement">{{citation |url=http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_1.cfm |title=American Physical Society Climate Change Policy Statement |date=November 2007}} "Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes. The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now. Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.</ref> | |||
<ref name="American Medical Association Policy Statement">{{citation |url=http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/20275.html |title=American Medical Association Policy Statement |year=2008}} "Support the findings of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which states that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that these changes will negatively affect public health. Support educating the medical community on the potential adverse public health effects of global climate change, including topics such as population displacement, flooding, infectious and vector-borne diseases, and healthy water supplies."</ref> | |||
<ref name="ametsoc">{{cite web|url=http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2012climatechange.html |title=AMS Information Statement on Climate Change |publisher=Ametsoc.org |date=2012-08-20 |accessdate=2012-08-27}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="ametsoc22">{{cite web|url=http://www.ametsoc.org/POLICY/climatechangeresearch_2003.html |title=Climate Change Research: Issues for the Atmospheric and Related Sciences Adopted by the AMS Council 9 February 2003 |publisher=Ametsoc.org |date=2003-02-09 |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="amos">{{cite web|url=http://www.amos.org.au/publications/cid/3/t/publications |title=Statement |publisher=AMOS |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="apha">{{citation |url=http://www.apha.org/advocacy/policy/policysearch/default.htm?id=1351 |title=American Public Health Association Policy Statement ‘’Addressing the Urgent Threat of Global Climate Change to Public Health and the Environment’’|year=2007}} "The long-term threat of global climate change to global health is extremely serious and the fourth IPCC report and other scientific literature demonstrate convincingly that anthropogenic ] are primarily responsible for this threat….US policy makers should immediately take necessary steps to reduce US emissions of GHGs, including carbon dioxide, to avert dangerous climate change."</ref> | |||
<ref name="AQAonAAPG">{{cite journal|author=Julie Brigham-Grette|title=Petroleum Geologists' Award to Novelist Crichton Is Inappropriate|journal=]|volume=87|issue=36|quote=The AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming.|url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006EO360008/abstract|date=September 2006|accessdate=2007-01-23|format=PDF|author-separator=,|display-authors=1|doi=10.1029/2006EO360008|bibcode=2006EOSTr..87..364B}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="ASA Statement on Climate Change">{{citation |url=http://www.amstat.org/news/climatechange.cfm |title=ASA Statement on Climate Change |date=November 30, 2007}} "The ASA endorses the IPCC conclusions.... Over the course of four assessment reports, a small number of statisticians have served as authors or reviewers. Although this involvement is encouraging, it does not represent the full range of statistical expertise available. ASA recommends that more statisticians should become part of the IPCC process. Such participation would be mutually beneficial to the assessment of climate change and its impacts and also to the statistical community."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Australian Coral Reef Society official letter">{{citation |url=http://www.australiancoralreefsociety.org/pdf/chadwick605a.pdf |title=Australian Coral Reef Society official letter |year=2006|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20060322170802/http://www.australiancoralreefsociety.org/pdf/chadwick605a.pdf|archivedate=22 March 2006}} Official communique regarding the ] and the "world-wide decline in ] through processes such as ], runoff of nutrients from the land, ], global climate change, ], ]", etc.: There is almost total ] among experts that the earth’s climate is changing as a result of the build-up of greenhouse gases. The IPCC (involving over 3,000 of the world’s experts) has come out with clear conclusions as to the reality of this phenomenon. One does not have to look further than the collective ] worldwide to see the string (of) statements on this worrying change to the earth’s atmosphere. There is broad scientific consensus that coral reefs are heavily affected by the activities of man and there are significant global influences that can make reefs more vulnerable such as global warming....It is highly likely that coral bleaching has been exacerbated by global warming."</ref> | |||
<ref name="australiancoralreefsociety">{{cite web|url=http://www.australiancoralreefsociety.org/ |title=Australian Coral Reef Society |publisher=Australian Coral Reef Society |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="autogenerated1">{{cite web | url=http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=4825 | title=Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC) to the G8 on sustainability, energy efficiency and climate change | year=2007 | accessdate=2012-08-28 | publisher=Network of African Science Academies |format=PDF}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="australiancoralreefsociety24">, June 16, 2006</ref> | |||
<ref name="Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change">{{cite journal | author=Naomi Oreskes | date=December 3, 2004 | title=Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change | journal=Science | volume=306 | issue=5702 | page=1686 | doi=10.1126/science.1103618 | url=http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/306/5702/1686.pdf |format=PDF | pmid=15576594}} ()</ref> | |||
<ref name="caets">http://www.caets.org/nae/naecaets.nsf/(weblinks)/WSAN-78QL9A?OpenDocument</ref> | |||
<ref name="CCSAASKQ">{{cite book |author=Committee on the Science of Climate Change, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council |title=Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions |publisher=National Academy Press |location=Washington DC |year=2001 |isbn=0-309-07574-2 |url=http://books.nap.edu/html/climatechange}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="cfcas"></ref> | |||
<ref name="Climate change statement from the Royal Society of New Zealand">{{cite web |first1=David |last1=Wratt |first2=James |last2=Renwick|url=http://www.royalsociety.org.nz/Site/news/media_releases/2008/clim0708.aspx |title=Climate change statement from the Royal Society of New Zealand |publisher=The Royal Society of New Zealand|date=2008-07-10 |accessdate=2010-01-20 }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="cmos"> (Updated, 2007)</ref> | |||
<ref name="Editorial: The Science of Climate Change">{{cite journal |title=Editorial: The Science of Climate Change |journal=Science |volume=292 |issue=5520 |page=1261 |date=May 18, 2001 |doi= 10.1126/science.292.5520.1261|url=http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/292/5520/1261}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="DZ_EOS_2009">{{cite journal|first=Peter T.|last=Doran|author2=Maggie Kendall Zimmerman |date=January 20, 2009|title=Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change|journal=]|volume=90|issue=3 |pages=22–23|url=http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf|doi=10.1029/2009EO030002|bibcode=2009EOSTr..90...22D}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="euro-acad"></ref> | |||
<ref name="EPS Position Paper ''Energy for the future: The Nuclear Option''">{{citation |url=http://archive.is/20120710100158/http://academiaeuropaea.ift.uib.no/physics/EPS-2.pdf |title=EPS Position Paper ''Energy for the future: The Nuclear Option'' |year=2007}} "The emission of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, among which carbon dioxide is the main contributor, has amplified the natural greenhouse effect and led to global warming. The main contribution stems from burning fossil fuels. A further increase will have decisive effects on life on earth. An energy cycle with the lowest possible {{CO2}} emission is called for wherever possible to combat climate change."</ref> | |||
<ref name="eurogeologists">{{cite web|url=http://www.eurogeologists.de/index.php?section=home |title=EFG Website | Home |publisher=Eurogeologists.de |date=2011-08-10 |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="eurogeologists9"></ref> | |||
<ref name="European Science Foundation Position Paper ''Impacts of Climate Change on the European Marine and Coastal Environment — Ecosystems Approach''">{{citation |url=http://www.esf.org/publications/position-papers.html |title=European Science Foundation Position Paper ''Impacts of Climate Change on the European Marine and Coastal Environment — Ecosystems Approach'' |pages=7–10 |year=2007}} "There is now convincing evidence that since the industrial revolution, human activities, resulting in increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases have become a major agent of climate change. These greenhouse gases affect the global climate by retaining heat in the troposphere, thus raising the average temperature of the planet and altering global atmospheric circulation and precipitation patterns. While on-going national and international actions to curtail and reduce greenhouse gas emissions are essential, the levels of greenhouse gases currently in the atmosphere, and their impact, are likely to persist for several decades. On-going and increased efforts to mitigate climate change through reduction in greenhouse gases are therefore crucial."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Expert credibility in climate change">{{cite journal |last=Anderegg |first=William R L |last2=Prall |first2=James W. |last3=Harold |first3=Jacob |last4=Schneider |first4=Stephen H. |authorlink4=Stephen H. Schneider |title=Expert credibility in climate change |journal=Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. |year=2010 |url=http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html |pmid=20566872 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1003187107 |volume=107 |issue=27 |pages=12107–9 |pmc=2901439 |bibcode = 2010PNAS..10712107A }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="foxnews">{{cite web|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249659,00.html |title=U.N. Report: Global Warming Man-Made, Basically Unstoppable |publisher=Fox News |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="FASTS Statement on Climate Change">{{citation |url=http://www.fasts.org/images/policy-discussion/statement-climate-change.pdf |title=FASTS Statement on Climate Change |year=2008}} "Global climate change is real and measurable. Since the start of the 20th century, the global mean surface temperature of the Earth has increased by more than 0.7°C and the rate of warming has been largest in the last 30 years. Key vulnerabilities arising from climate change include water resources, food supply, health, coastal settlements, biodiversity and some key ] such as coral reefs and alpine regions. As the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases increases, impacts become more severe and widespread. To reduce the global net economic, environmental and social losses in the face of these impacts, the policy objective must remain squarely focused on returning greenhouse gas concentrations to near pre-industrial levels through the reduction of emissions. The spatial and temporal fingerprint of warming can be traced to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, which are a direct result of burning fossil fuels, broad-scale deforestation and other human activity."</ref> | |||
<ref name="geolsoc">{{cite web|url=http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/gsl/views/policy_statements/page7426.html |title=Geological Society - Climate change: evidence from the geological record |publisher=Geolsoc.org.uk |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="geoscience">{{cite web|author=billobrien.coml |url=http://geoscience.ca/_ARCHIVE_jan7_2011/climatechange.html |title=Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences (CFES) |publisher=Geoscience.ca |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="geosociety">{{cite web|url=http://www.geosociety.org/positions/position10.htm |title=The Geological Society of America - Position Statement on Global Climate Change |publisher=Geosociety.org |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="Global Environmental Change — Microbial Contributions, Microbial Solutions">{{citation |url=http://www.asm.org/images/docfilename/0000006005/globalwarming%5B1%5D.pdf |title=Global Environmental Change — Microbial Contributions, Microbial Solutions |date=May 2006 |format=PDF |publisher=]}} They recommended "reducing net anthropogenic {{CO2}} emissions to the atmosphere” and “minimizing anthropogenic disturbances of” atmospheric gases. Carbon dioxide concentrations were relatively stable for the past 10,000 years but then began to increase rapidly about 150 years ago…as a result of fossil fuel consumption and land use change. Of course, changes in atmospheric composition are but one component of global change, which also includes disturbances in the physical and chemical conditions of the oceans and land surface. Although global change has been a natural process throughout Earth’s history, humans are responsible for substantially accelerating present-day changes. These changes may adversely affect human health and the ] on which we depend. Outbreaks of a number of diseases, including ], ], ], ], and ], have been linked to climate change."</ref> | |||
<ref name="globalchange"></ref> | |||
<ref name="IAGLR Fact Sheet ''The Great Lakes at a Crossroads: Preparing for a Changing Climate''">{{citation |url=http://www.iaglr.org/scipolicy/factsheets/iaglr_crossroads_climatechange.pdf |title=IAGLR Fact Sheet ''The Great Lakes at a Crossroads: Preparing for a Changing Climate'' |date=February 2009}} "While the Earth’s climate has changed many times during the planet’s history because of natural factors, including volcanic eruptions and changes in the Earth’s orbit, never before have we observed the present rapid rise in temperature and carbon dioxide ({{CO2}}). Human activities resulting from the industrial revolution have changed the chemical composition of the atmosphere....Deforestation is now the second largest contributor to global warming, after the burning of fossil fuels. These human activities have significantly increased the concentration of “greenhouse gases” in the atmosphere. As the Earth’s climate warms, we are seeing many changes: stronger, more destructive hurricanes; heavier rainfall; more disastrous flooding; more areas of the world experiencing severe drought; and more heat waves."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly">{{cite web |url=http://www.grida.no/polar/news/2427.aspx |title=Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly|publisher=UNEP/GRID-Arendal|date=2004-11-08|accessdate=2010-01-20 }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="inqua"></ref> | |||
<ref name="interacademycouncil">{{cite web|url=http://www.interacademycouncil.net/CMS/3239.aspx |title=InterAcademy Council |publisher=InterAcademy Council |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="interacademycouncil7">{{cite web|url=http://www.interacademycouncil.net/CMS/Reports/11840/11842.aspx |title=InterAcademy Council |publisher=InterAcademy Council |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="interacademycouncil8">{{cite web|url=http://www.interacademycouncil.net/CMS/Reports/11840/11971/11979.aspx |title=InterAcademy Council |publisher=InterAcademy Council |accessdate=2012-07-30}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="iob">{{citation |url=http://www.iob.org/general.asp?section=science_policy/policy_issues&article=climate_change.xml |title=Institute of Biology policy page ‘Climate Change’}} "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 ] 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."</ref> | |||
<ref name="ipcc1">IPCC, , , in {{Harvnb|IPCC AR4 SYR|2007}}."It is likely that increases in GHG concentrations alone would have caused more warming than observed because volcanic and anthropogenic aerosols have offset some warming that would otherwise have taken place."</ref> | |||
<ref name="iugg"></ref> | |||
<ref name="IPENZ Informatory Note, ''Climate Change and the greenhouse effect''">{{citation |url=http://www.ipenz.org.nz/ipenz/forms/pdfs/Info_Note_6.pdf |title=IPENZ Informatory Note, ''Climate Change and the greenhouse effect'' |date=October 2001}} "Human activities have increased the concentration of these atmospheric greenhouse gases, and although the changes are relatively small, the equilibrium maintained by the atmosphere is delicate, and so the effect of these changes is significant. The world’s most important greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide, a by-product of the burning of fossil fuels. Since the time of the Industrial Revolution about 200 years ago, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased from about 280 parts per million to 370 parts per million, an increase of around 30%. On the basis of available data, climate scientists are now projecting an average global temperature rise over this century of 2.0 to 4.5°C. This compared with 0.6°C over the previous century – about a 500% increase... This could lead to changing, and for all emissions scenarios more unpredictable, weather patterns around the world, less frost days, more extreme events (droughts and storm or flood disasters), and warmer sea temperatures and melting glaciers causing sea levels to rise. ... Professional engineers commonly deal with risk, and frequently have to make judgments based on incomplete data. The available evidence suggests very strongly that human activities have already begun to make significant changes to the earth’s climate, and that the long-term risk of delaying action is greater than the cost of avoiding/minimising the risk."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Letter to US Senators">{{citation |url=http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2009/media/1021climate_letter.pdf |title=Letter to US Senators |date=October 2009}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="journalistsresource">{{cite news|url=http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/climate-change/structure-scientific-opinion-climate-change/|title="Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change" at Journalist's Resource.org}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="nagt">http://www.nagt.org/index.html</ref> | |||
<ref name="nagt11">http://nagt.org/nagt/organization/ps-climate.html</ref> | |||
<ref name="nationalacademies">, 2005</ref> | |||
<ref name="nas"> | |||
{{cite book | |||
| year=2008 | |||
| title=Understanding and Responding to Climate Change. A brochure prepared by the US National Research Council (US NRC) | |||
| publisher=US National Academy of Sciences | |||
| author=US NRC | |||
| url=http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/booklets/climate_change_2008_final.pdf | |||
| location = Washington DC, USA | |||
}} | }} | ||
</ref> | |||
<ref name="nationalacademies5"></ref> | |||
<ref name="nationalacademies21"></ref> | |||
<ref name="nationalacademies6"></ref> | |||
<ref name="nytimes"></ref> | |||
<ref name="On the Climate Change Beat, Doubt Gives Way to Certainty">{{cite news |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/06/science/earth/06clim.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=53862c0cdf77d1c0&ex=1328418000&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss |title=On the Climate Change Beat, Doubt Gives Way to Certainty |newspaper=New York Times |accessdate=2010-08-28 |accessdate=2007-02-06 |first=William K. |last= Stevens |quote=The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said the likelihood was 90 percent to 99 percent that emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, spewed from tailpipes and smokestacks, were the dominant cause of the observed warming of the last 50 years. In the panel’s parlance, this level of certainty is labeled “very likely.” Only rarely does scientific odds-making provide a more definite answer than that, at least in this branch of science, and it describes the endpoint, so far, of a progression. | date=2007-02-06 }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="Oreskes_consensus">{{cite book |title=Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren |editor1-last=DiMento |editor1-first=Joseph F. C. |editor2-last=Doughman |editor2-first=Pamela M. |year=2007 |publisher=MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-54193-0 |pages=65–66 |chapter=The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We’re Not Wrong? |last=Oreskes |first=Naomi |ref=harv |chapterurl=http://books.google.com/books?id=PXJIqCkb7YIC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA65#v=onepage&q&f=false |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=PXJIqCkb7YIC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="Oreskes07p68">{{harvnb|Oreskes|2007|p=}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="pik-potsdam"></ref> | |||
<ref name="Policy Statement, Climate Change and Energy">{{citation |url=http://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/representation/policy-positions/climate-change.cfm | title=Policy Statement, Climate Change and Energy |date=February 2007}} "Engineers Australia believes that Australia must act swiftly and proactively in line with global expectations to address climate change as an economic, social and environmental risk... We believe that addressing the costs of atmospheric emissions will lead to increasing our competitive advantage by minimising risks and creating new economic opportunities. Engineers Australia believes the Australian Government should ratify the Kyoto Protocol."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Prediction' or 'Projection; The nomenclature of climate science">{{cite journal |author=Bray, D.|author2=von Storch H. |year=2009 |title=Prediction' or 'Projection; The nomenclature of climate science |journal=] |volume=30 |pages=534–543 |doi=10.1177/1075547009333698 |issue=4}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="rosenthal">{{cite news |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/science/earth/03climate.html?ex=1328158800&en=61f42312221df544&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss%3Cbr%20/%3E |title=Science Panel Calls Global Warming ‘Unequivocal’ |newspaper=New York Times |first=Elisabeth |last=Rosenthal |first2= Andrew C. |last2=Revkin |accessdate=2007-02-03 |accessdate=2010-08-28 |quote=the leading international network of climate scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is 'unequivocal' and that human activity is the main driver, 'very likely' causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950 | date=2007-02-03}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="rmets">http://www.rmets.org/news/detail.php?ID=332</ref> | |||
<ref name="RS-CC">{{cite web |url=http://royalsociety.org/Climate-Change/ |title=New guide to science of climate change |publisher=The Royal Society |accessdate=9 June 2010}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="SAF ''Forest Management and Climate Change ''">{{citation |url=http://www.safnet.org/policyandpresspsst/climate_change_expires12-8-2013.pdf |title=SAF ''Forest Management and Climate Change '' |year=2008}} "Forests are shaped by climate....Changes in temperature and precipitation regimes therefore have the potential to dramatically affect forests nationwide. There is growing evidence that our climate is changing. The changes in temperature have been associated with increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide ({{CO2}}) and other GHGs in the atmosphere."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Society to review climate message">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10178124.stm |title=Society to review climate message |last=Harrabin |first=Roger |publisher=BBC News |date=27 May 2010 |accessdate=9 June 2010}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="SAF ''Forest Offset Projects in a Carbon Trading System''">{{citation |url=http://www.safnet.org/policyandpresspsst/offset_projections_expires12-8-2013.pdf |title=SAF ''Forest Offset Projects in a Carbon Trading System'' |year=2008}} "Forests play a significant role in offsetting {{CO2}} emissions, the primary anthropogenic GHG."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Some excitable climate-change deniers just don't understand what science is">{{cite web |url=http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Some+excitable+climate+change+deniersjust+understand+what+science/3128015/story.html |title=Some excitable climate-change deniers just don't understand what science is |last=Gardner |first=Dan |publisher=Montreal Gazette |date=8 June 2010 |accessdate=9 June 2010}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="soils"></ref> | |||
<ref name="Stanowisko Zgromadzenia Ogólnego PAN z dnia 13 grudnia 2007 r">{{cite web|url=http://www.aktualnosci.pan.pl/images/stories/pliki/stanowiska_opinie/2008/stanowisko_pan_131207.pdf|title=Stanowisko Zgromadzenia Ogólnego PAN z dnia 13 grudnia 2007 r|publisher=Polish Academy of Sciences|language=Polish|accessdate=2009-06-16}} ''Note'': As of 16 June 2009, PAS has not issued this statement in English, all citations have been translated from Polish.</ref> | |||
<!--ref name="stateclimate">http://www.stateclimate.org/publications/default.php?content=policies</ref--> | |||
<!--ref name="stateclimate15"> by the American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)</ref--> | |||
<ref name="AR4-warming-unequivocal">"Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level." IPCC, , , in {{Harvnb|IPCC AR4 SYR|2007}}.</ref> | |||
<ref name="Warming 'very likely' human-made">{{cite news |title=Warming 'very likely' human-made |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6321351.stm |work=] |publisher=BBC |date=2007-02-01 |accessdate=2007-02-01 }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="The Science of Climate Change">, ]</ref> | |||
<ref name="telegraph.co.uk">{{cite news| url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/7778917/Royal-Society-to-publish-guide-on-climate-change-to-counter-claims-of-exaggeration.html | location=London | work=The Daily Telegraph | title=Royal Society to publish guide on climate change to counter claims of 'exaggeration' | first=Louise | last=Gray | date=May 29, 2010}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="www">http://www.egu.eu/statements/position-statement-of-the-divisions-of-atmospheric-and-climate-sciences-7-july-2005.html</ref> | |||
<ref name="www10">http://www.egu.eu/statements/egu-position-statement-on-ocean-acidification.html</ref> | |||
<ref name="Wildlife Society ''Global Climate Change and Wildlife''">{{citation |url=http://joomla.wildlife.org/documents/positionstatements/35-Global%20Climate%20Change%20and%20Wildlife.pdf |title=Wildlife Society ''Global Climate Change and Wildlife''}} "Scientists throughout the world have concluded that climate research conducted in the past two decades definitively shows that rapid worldwide climate change occurred in the 20th century, and will likely continue to occur for decades to come. Although climates have varied dramatically since the Earth was formed, few scientists question the role of humans in exacerbating recent climate change through the emission of greenhouse gases. The critical issue is no longer “if” climate change is occurring, but rather how to address its effects on ] and ]s." 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 ] (i.e., plants).”</ref> | |||
<ref name="wfpha">{{citation |url=http://www.wfpha.org/Archives/01.22%20Global%20Climate%20Change.pdf |title=World Federation of Public Health Associations resolution "Global Climate Change" |year=2001}} "Noting the conclusions of the ] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other climatologists that anthropogenic greenhouse gases, which contribute to global climate change, have substantially increased in atmospheric concentration beyond natural processes and have increased by 28 percent since the industrial revolution….Realizing that subsequent health effects from such perturbations in the climate system would likely include an increase in: heat-related mortality and morbidity; vector-borne infectious diseases,… ]…(and) malnutrition from threatened agriculture….the World Federation of Public Health Associations…recommends precautionary primary preventive measures to avert climate change, including reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and preservation of greenhouse gas sinks through appropriate energy and land use policies, in view of the scale of potential health impacts...."</ref> | |||
<ref name="WHO ''Protecting health from climate change''">{{citation |url=http://www.who.int/world-health-day/toolkit/report_web.pdf |title=WHO ''Protecting health from climate change'' |year=2008 |page=2 |accessdate=2009-04-18}}</ref> | |||
<ref name="Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate change">{{citation |url=http://www.aas.org/governance/council/resolutions.php#climate |title=Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate change |publisher=American Astronomical Society |year=2004}} "In endorsing the "Human Impacts on Climate" statement , the AAS recognizes the collective expertise of the AGU in scientific subfields central to assessing and understanding global change, and acknowledges the strength of agreement among our AGU colleagues that the global climate is changing and human activities are contributing to that change."</ref> | |||
<ref name="Survey Tracks Scientists' Growing Climate Concern">{{cite web |last= Lavelle |first= Marianne |url=http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/04/23/survey-tracks-scientists-growing-climate-concern.html |title=Survey Tracks Scientists' Growing Climate Concern |publisher=U.S. News & World Report |date=2008-04-23 |accessdate=2010-01-20 }}</ref> | |||
<ref name="The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change">{{cite web |url= http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/10/27/ijpor.edr033.short|title= The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change|author= Stephen J. Farnsworth, S. Robert Lichter|date= October 27, 2011|publisher= International Journal of Public Opinion Research |accessdate= December 2, 2011 }}</ref> | |||
<!--ref name="ams2012">http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00091.1</ref--> | |||
}} | |||
<!-- The following sources are referred to using the harvnb template --> | |||
* {{Citation | |||
|year = 2001 | |||
|author = IPCC TAR SYR | |||
|author-link = IPCC | |||
|title = Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report | |||
|series = Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the ] of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change | |||
|editor = Watson, R. T.; and the Core Writing Team | |||
|publisher = Cambridge University Press | |||
|url = http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/vol4/english/index.htm | |||
|isbn = 0-521-80770-0 | |||
}} (pb: {{ISBNT|0-521-01507-3}}). | |||
* {{Citation | |||
|year = 2007 | |||
|author = IPCC AR4 WG2 | |||
|author-link = IPCC | |||
|title = Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability | |||
|series = Contribution of Working Group II to the ] of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change | |||
|editor = Parry, M.L.; Canziani, O.F.; Palutikof, J.P.; van der Linden, P.J.; and Hanson, C.E. | |||
|publisher = Cambridge University Press | |||
|url = http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/contents.html | |||
|isbn = 978-0-521-88010-7 | |||
}} (pb: {{ISBNT|978-0-521-70597-4}}). | |||
* {{Citation | |||
|year = 2007 | |||
|author = IPCC AR4 WG3 | |||
|author-link = IPCC | |||
|title = Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change | |||
|series = Contribution of Working Group III to the ] of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change | |||
|editor = Metz, B.; Davidson, O.R.; Bosch, P.R.; Dave, R.; and Meyer, L.A. | |||
|publisher = Cambridge University Press | |||
|url = http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/contents.html | |||
|isbn = 978-0-521-88011-4 | |||
}} (pb: {{ISBNT|978-0-521-70598-1}}). | |||
* {{Citation | |||
| year = 2007 | |||
| author = IPCC AR4 SYR | |||
| author-link = IPCC | |||
| title = Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report (SYR) | |||
| series = Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the ] (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change | |||
| editor = Core Writing Team; Pachauri, R.K; and Reisinger, A. | |||
| publisher = IPCC | |||
| location=], ] | |||
| url = http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/contents.html | |||
| isbn = 92-9169-122-4 | |||
}}. | |||
*{{citation | |||
| year=2001 | |||
| title=Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions. A report by the Committee on the Science of Climate Change, US National Research Council (NRC) | |||
| publisher=National Academy Press | |||
| location=Washington, D.C., USA | |||
| author=US NRC | |||
| url=http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10139&page=1 | |||
| isbn=0-309-07574-2 | |||
| archiveurl= http://web.archive.org/web/20110605132107/http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10139&page=1 | |||
| archivedate= 5 June 2011 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no | |||
}} | |||
==External links== | |||
* {{cite web |url= http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-are-americans-so-ill|author= Robin Lloyd|title= Why Are Americans So Ill-Informed about Climate Change? |date= 23 February 2011|publisher= ] |accessdate= 31 March 2011}} | |||
{{ |
{{Climate change}} | ||
] | |||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Scientific Opinion On Climate Change}} | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | ] |
Latest revision as of 20:28, 5 October 2024
Evaluation of climate change by the scientific community
There is a nearly unanimous scientific consensus that the Earth has been consistently warming since the start of the Industrial Revolution, that the rate of recent warming is largely unprecedented, and that this warming is mainly the result of a rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by human activities. The human activities causing this warming include fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and land use changes such as deforestation, with a significant supporting role from the other greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide. This human role in climate change is considered "unequivocal" and "incontrovertible".
Nearly all actively publishing climate scientists say humans are causing climate change. Surveys of the scientific literature are another way to measure scientific consensus. A 2019 review of scientific papers found the consensus on the cause of climate change to be at 100%, and a 2021 study concluded that over 99% of scientific papers agree on the human cause of climate change. The small percentage of papers that disagreed with the consensus often contained errors or could not be replicated.
The evidence for global warming due to human influence has been recognized by the national science academies of all the major industrialized countries. In the scientific literature, there is a very strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view. A few organizations with members in extractive industries hold non-committal positions, and some have tried to persuade the public that climate change is not happening, or if the climate is changing it is not because of human influence, attempting to sow doubt in the scientific consensus.
Existence of a scientific consensus
Studies of the scientific opinion on climate change have been undertaken since the 1970s, and they have been establishing widespread consensus since the 1990s, with the level of agreement increasing over time. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the scientific opinion on climate change via their peer-reviewed publications, while the scientific bodies of national or international standing summarise the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty in synthesis reports.
Examples of such reports include or the 2004 Arctic Climate Impact Assessment from the International Arctic Science Committee and the governments of the Arctic Council, or the United States' National Climate Assessment, which has been released periodically since 2000 under the auspices of the United States Global Change Research Program. The fourth NCA, released in 2017, involved the efforts of thirteen federal agencies, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and around "1,000 people, including 300 leading scientists, roughly half from outside the government."
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had been formed by the United Nations in 1988, and it presents reports summarizing the strength and extent of consensus on climate change and its numerous aspects to the member states of the United Nations, with the major reports released at 5-to-7-year intervals starting from 1990.
Between 1990 and 2023, the IPCC has published six comprehensive assessment reports reviewing the latest climate science. The IPCC has also produced 14 special reports on particular topics. Each assessment report has four parts. These are a contribution from each of the three working groups, plus a synthesis report. The synthesis report integrates the working group contributions. It also integrates any special reports produced in that assessment cycle.In 2001, science academies from 17 countries (Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, Trinidad, Turkey and the United Kingdom made a joint statement endorsing the work of IPCC. They concurred that the temperatures are rising and will continue to rise due to human activities, and also stressed the importance of cutting greenhouse gas emissions, concluding that "Business as usual is no longer a viable option". It is also notable for being one of the first statements to explicitly use the term "consensus". In 2005, another joint statement from the science academies of major countries (Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom and the United States referred to the conclusions of the IPCC as "the international scientific consensus", and urged prompt action on both climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation. Elsewhere around the world, other organizations to have referred to the scientific consensus include Network of African Science Academies in 2007, and the International Union for Quaternary Research in 2008.
In 2013, a study which found that out of over 4,000 peer-reviewed papers on climate science published since 1990, 97% agree, explicitly or implicitly, that global warming is happening and is human-caused. Surveys of scientists' views on climate change – with a focus on human caused climate change – have been undertaken since the 1970s. A 2016 reanalysis confirmed that "the finding of 97% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies." A 2019 study found scientific consensus to be at 100%, and a 2021 study found that consensus exceeded 99%.
Consensus points
The scientific consensus regarding causes and mechanisms of climate change, its effects and what should be done about it (climate action) is that:
- It is "unequivocal" and "incontrovertible" that the greenhouse gas emissions from human activities have caused warming on land, in oceans and in the troposphere. There are no natural processes which can provide an alternate explanation.
- The atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide are the highest they have been in at least 2 million years, if not 3.2 million years. The atmospheric levels of two other major greenhouse gases, methane and nitrous oxide, are the highest they have been in at least the past 800,000 years. The record of the past 800,000 years also shows that the increases in their concentrations seen since 1750 would take millennia to be caused by natural processes.
- The decade of 2010s has been 1.1 °C (2.0 °F) warmer than the late 19th century, and the warmest since the start of a consistent instrumental temperature record. The warming of the past 50 years has occurred faster than any other warming over the past 2,000 years, if not longer.
- Precipitation appears to have been increasing since 1950, but the rainfall patterns have also been shifting, and there is more evidence for increases in heavy precipitation which causes flash floods.
- Global sea level has increased by 20–25 cm (8–10 in) since 1900, with half of that increase occurring since 1980. This sea level rise has been the fastest in "at least the last 3000 years", which is very likely to have been caused by human activity.
- As the recent warming heats the ocean, its water expands in volume. This causes half of the recent sea level rise, with the rest due to the warming melting the ice sheets and glaciers.
- While there have always been severe and extreme weather events (e.g. tropical cyclones, thunderstorms, tornados, droughts, heat waves, precipitation extremes), climate change has made many of them more severe, more frequent, or more likely to co-occur, in every part of the globe.
- The dangers of extreme weather events will continue increasing unless there is a rapid decrease in greenhouse gas emissions needed to curb further warming.
- Increased warming will lead to worse impacts.
- The extent of human-caused emissions will be the main cause of future warming.
Statements by major scientific organizations about climate change
Main article: List of statements by major scientific organizations about climate changeMany of the major scientific organizations about climate change have issued formal statements of opinion. The vast majority of these statements concur with the IPCC view, some very few are non-committal, or dissent from it. The California Governor's Office website lists nearly 200 worldwide scientific organizations who hold the position that climate change has been caused by human action.
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change
See also: History of climate change science1970s
In 1978, the National Defense University of the United States had surveyed 24 experts about the near-term climate change and its effects on agriculture. The majority of respondents had expected some warming to occur between 1970 and 2000, and described human emissions of carbon dioxide as the primary cause, but there was a disagreement on the extent, and a few had thought that an increase in volcanic activity would offset carbon dioxide emissions by elevating atmospheric sulfate concentrations (which have a reflective effect, also associated with global dimming, and with some solar geoengineering proposals) and result in overall cooling. When NDU had combined their predictions, they estimated a 10% likelihood of large (~0.6 °C (1.1 °F)) cooling occurring by 2000, a 25% likelihood of smaller cooling around 0.15 °C (0.27 °F), a 30% likelihood of limited change, with around 0.1 °C (0.18 °F) warming, a 25% likelihood of "moderate" warming of ~0.4 °C (0.72 °F), and a 10% likelihood of large warming of around 1 °C (1.8 °F). Subsequently, about 0.5 °C (0.90 °F) had occurred between 1950 and 2000, with about 0.4 °C (0.72 °F) since 1970, largely matching the survey's "moderate global warming" scenario.
1980s
In 1989, David H. Slade had surveyed 21 climate scientists, of whom 17 had expressed "a strong belief" in "the reality of a significant climate change".
1990s
In March 1990, Cutter Information Corporation (now known as Cutter Consortium) sent questionnaires to 1500 researchers who were on the attendance lists of climate change conferences, and received 331 responses from 41 countries. The survey revealed widespread agreement that global warming is already happening, that it will result in negative impacts such as sea level rise, and that reducing carbon dioxide emissions and halting deforestation is an appropriate response to it. Only 1.9% of respondents predicted that there would be an overall cooling across the next 100 years. There was more disagreement on the strength of future warming: i.e. around 30% believed that there was a less than 50% chance that the warming would reach or exceed 2 °C (3.6 °F) over the next 100 years, while a larger fraction (almost 40%) thought such temperatures were at least 75% likely.
In 1991, the Center for Science, Technology, and Media sent a survey of 6 questions to around 4000 ocean and atmospheric scientists from 45 countries, and received 118 responses by January 1992, with 91% from North America. Out of those 118 scientists, 73 have either agreed or "strongly" agreed with the statement "There is little doubt among scientists that global mean temperature will increase", while 27 had disagreed and only 9 had "strongly disagreed", with the remaining 9 "neutral". 58 scientists had agreed that the effects of climate change are expected to be "substantial" by the scientific community as a whole, with 36 disagreeing and 21 staying neutral. Finally, when asked about the 1990 IPCC estimate of warming proceeding at 0.3 °F (0.17 °C) per decade throughout the 21st century under the business-as-usual climate change scenario, 13 (15%) expressed skepticism, 39 (44%) had emphasized uncertainty, and 37 (42%) had agreed. 52% thought the rate of warming would likely be lower, and 8% thought it would be higher. As of 2023, the rate of warming had been 0.2 °F (0.11 °C) or less.
In 1996, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, a pair of researchers at the Helmholtz Research Centre's Institute for Coastal Research, sent a questionnaire over mail to 1000 climate scientists in Germany, the United States and Canada. 40% responded, and the results subsequently published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society in 1999. On a scale of 1 out of 7, where higher numbers indicated greater disagreement, "global warming is already underway" had a mean rating of 3.4, and "global warming will occur in the future" had an even greater agreement of 2.6 Surveyed scientists had less confidence in the accuracy of contemporary climate models, rating their ability to make "reasonable predictions" 10 years out at 4.8, and 5.2 for 100-year predictions: however, they consistently rejected the notion that there was too much uncertainty to justify taking immediate action, with a mean 5.6 out of 7 rating. In fact, they usually agreed there was substantial uncertainty about how strongly the impacts will affect society, and that many changes would likely be necessary to adapt.
2000–2004
In 2003, Bray and von Storch repeated their 1996 survey, using the same response structure with ratings on a 1–7 scale, and including all of the original questions. Further, new questions were added, which were devoted to climate change adaptation and media coverage of climate change. This second survey received 530 responses from 27 different countries, but it has been strongly 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. While the survey required entry of a username and password, its critics alleged that both were circulated to non-scientists, including to a climate change denial mailing list. Bray and von Storch defended their results, claiming that a statistical analysis with a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and a Wald–Wolfowitz runs test revealed no significant irregularities.
In general, the second survey had demonstrated an increase in scientific confidence relative to the first. One of the greatest increases was for the statement "We can say for certain that global warming is a process already underway", where 1 represented strong agreement and 7 strong disagreement: the mean response went from 3.39 to 2.41. In response to the question, "To what extent do you agree or disagree that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes?", it went from 4.17 to 3.62. Notably, the percentage of respondents "strongly disagreeing" stayed the same, at 10%, and a similar percentage stayed neutral (14% in 1996 and 13% in 2003): yet, the overall split went from 41% agreement and 45% disagreement in 1996 to 56% agreement and 30% disagreement in 2003, as there was both a substantial increase in agreement and a decline percentage of those disagreeing less strongly. Similarly, there was a 72% to 20% split in favour of describing 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."
In 2004, the geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes analyzed the abstracts of 928 scientific papers on "global climate change" published between 1993 and 2003. 75% had either explicitly expressed support for the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change, or had accepted it as a given and were focused on evaluating its impacts or proposing approaches for climate change mitigation, while the remaining 25% were devoted to methods of current climate change research or paleoclimate analysis. No abstract had explicitly rejected the scientific consensus.
2005–2009
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, publishing the results in April 2008. 97% of the scientists surveyed agreed that global temperatures had increased during the past 100 years, and only 5% believed that human activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming. 84% said they personally believed human-induced warming was occurring, and 74% agreed that "currently available scientific evidence" substantiated its occurrence. 56% described the study of global climate change as a mature science and 39% as an emerging science. When asked about the likely severity of effects of climate change over the next 50–100 years, 41% said they could be described as catastrophic; 44% thought the effects would be moderately dangerous while about 13% thought there was relatively little danger.
The third Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch survey was also conducted in 2008, with the results published in 2010. It used the same methodology as their two previous surveys, with a similar number of sections and also asking to rate responses on a 1-to-7 scale (i.e. from 'not at all' to 'very much'), but it had also introduced web links with respondent-specific unique identifiers to eliminate multiple responses. 2058 climate scientists from 34 countries were surveyed, and a total of 373 responses were received (response rate of 18.2%).
To the question "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 67.1% said they very much agreed (7), 26.7% agreed to some large extent (6), 6.2% said to they agreed to some small extent (2–4), none said they did not agree at all. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?" the responses were 34.6% very much agree, 48.9% agreeing to a large extent, 15.1% to a small extent, and 1.35% not agreeing at all. Similarly, 34.6% had very much agreed that climate change "poses a very serious and dangerous threat to humanity" and 27.6% agreed to a large extent, while only 1.1% did not agree at all.
At the same time, the respondents had strongly rejected the concept of intentionally presenting the most extreme possibilities in the hope of mobilizing the public, with around 73% disagreeing (1–3), 12.5% unsure and 14.5% agreeing in any way (5–7). Only 1.6% had agreed very much, while 27.2% did not agree at all, even as they overwhelmingly agreed (84% vs. 4%) that the scientists who do this are the most likely to be listened to by journalists. The respondents have generally expressed high confidence in the IPCC reports, with 63.5% agreeing that they estimated the impacts of temperature change exactly right (4 on the scale), and only 1.4% responding that they had strongly underestimated and 2.5% that they had strongly overestimated those impacts (1 and 7 on a scale.) On sea level rise, 51.4% thought the reports were exactly right, and only about 16% thought it was overestimated in any way (5–7), while the remaining third believed it was underestimated (1–3). Subsequent IPCC reports had been forced to regularly increase their estimates of future sea level rise, largely in response to newer research on the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica.
In 2009, Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at University of Illinois at Chicago polled 10,257 earth scientists from various specialities and received replies from 3,146. 79 respondents were climatologists who had published over half of their peer-reviewed research on the subject of climate change, and 76 of them agreed that mean global temperatures had risen compared to pre-1800s levels, with 75 describing human activity as a significant factor. 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. In summary, Doran and Zimmerman wrote:
It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes.
2010–2014
A 2010 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America reviewed publication and citation data for 1,372 climate researchers, 908 of whom had authored 20 or more publications on climate, and found that
(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.
In October 2011, researchers from George Mason University analyzed the results of a survey of 998 actively working scientists from the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Society, or listed in the 23rd edition of American Men and Women of Science, 489 of whom had returned completed questionnaires. 97% of respondents had agreed that global temperatures have risen over the past century. 84% agreed that "human-induced greenhouse warming is now occurring," 5% disagreed, and 12% didn't know. When asked what they regard as "the likely effects of global climate change in the next 50 to 100 years," on a scale of 1 to 10, from Trivial to Catastrophic: 13% of respondents replied 1 to 3 (trivial/mild), 44% replied 4 to 7 (moderate), 41% replied 8 to 10 (severe/catastrophic), and 2% didn't know.
In 2012, James L. Powell, a former member of the National Science Board, analyzed published research on global warming and climate change between 1991 and 2012 and found that of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 (<0.2%) rejected anthropogenic global warming. This was a follow-up to an analysis looking at 2,258 peer-reviewed articles published between November 2012 and December 2013, which revealed that only one of the 9,136 authors rejected anthropogenic global warming.
Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch had conducted their fourth survey in 2013, publishing its results the following year. 283 scientists had responded: 185 (65.4%) had been working in climate science for over 15 years, and only 19 (6.7%) had 0 to 5 years of experience. It had the same methodology as the third survey, ranking responses on a 1-to-7 scale and similar responses to the same questions: i.e., when asked, "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 74.7% said they very much agreed (7), 2.9% were "neutral" (4), and only 2.1% were 1–3 on the scale. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?", 43% had very much agreed, 28.5% agreeing to a large extent (6), 16.6% to a small extent (2–4), and 2.5% did not agree at all (1). 41.8% had very much agreed that climate change "poses a very serious and dangerous threat to humanity" and 23.2% agreed to a large extent, while 3.5% did not agree at all. A new question asked respondents to attribute a percentage of recent warming to anthropogenic causes: 73.3% of scientists attributed 70–100%, while only 1.5% said there was zero human role.
In 2013, another scientist, John Cook, examined 11,944 abstracts from the peer-reviewed scientific literature from 1991 to 2011 that matched the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'. He and his co-authors found that, while 66.4% of them expressed no position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), of those that did, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are contributing to global warming. They also invited authors to rate their own papers and found that, while 35.5% rated their paper as expressing no position on AGW (known to be expected in a consensus situation) 97.2% of the rest endorsed the consensus. In both cases the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position was marginally increasing over time. They concluded that the number of papers actually rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research, and that "the fundamental science of AGW is no longer controversial among the publishing science community and the remaining debate in the field has moved on to other topics."
In 2014, researchers from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency surveyed 1,868 climate scientists. They found that, consistent with other research, the level of agreement on anthropogenic causation correlated with expertise – 90% of those surveyed with more than 10 peer-reviewed papers related to climate (just under half of survey respondents) explicitly agreed that greenhouse gases were the main cause of global warming. They included researchers on mitigation and adaptation in their surveys in addition to physical climate scientists, leading to a slightly lower level of consensus compared to previous studies.
2015–2019
A 2016 study titled Learning from mistakes in climate research followed up on John Cook's 2013 paper by examining the quality of the 3% of peer-reviewed papers which had rejected the consensus view. They discovered that "replication reveals a number of methodological flaws, and a pattern of common mistakes emerges that is not visible when looking at single isolated cases". That same year, Cook's paper was criticized by Richard Tol, but strongly defended by a companion paper in the same volume.
The 5th International Survey of Climate Scientists by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch took place over December 2015 and January 2016. Unlike the past surveys, the scientists were no longer questioned on their opinion of the IPCC, and there was much more focus on extreme event attribution. In other ways, it had replicated the methodology of the previous surveys, with most responses ranked on a 1-to-7 scale. There were over 600 complete responses: 291 (45.2%) had been working in climate science for over 15 years, while 79 (12.3%) had 0 to 5 years of experience. When asked "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 79.3% said they very much agreed (7), 1.2% were "neutral" (4), and only 2.1% were 1–3 on the scale. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?", 47.7% had very much agreed, 26% agreeing to a large extent (6), 9.8% to a small extent (2–4), and 1.9% did not agree at all (1). 46% had very much agreed that climate change "poses a very serious and dangerous threat to humanity" and 26% agreed to a large extent, while 2.2% did not agree at all. 75.8% said that the level of uncertainty in climate science had decreased since 1996, while 13.6% said it had increased. 75.7% said that the level of risk associated with climate change had increased considerably since 1996, while 5% said it had decreased.
In 2017, James L. Powell analyzed five surveys of the peer-reviewed literature from 1991 to 2015, and found that they amounted to a combined 54,195 articles, few of which had outright rejected anthropogenic climate change, resulting in an average consensus of 99.94%. In November 2019, his survey of over 11,600 peer-reviewed articles published in the first seven months of 2019 showed that the consensus had reached 100%.
2020s
Scientific consensus on causation: Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2015) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science. A 2019 study found scientific consensus to be at 100%, and a 2021 study concluded that consensus exceeded 99%. Another 2021 study found that 98.7% of climate experts indicated that the Earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity.In a 2024 survey, 76.3% of responding IPCC lead authors and review editors projected at least 2.5 °C of global warming by 2100; only 5.79% forecast warming of 1.5 °C or less. Separately, then-current climate policies indicate the world will have warmed by about 2.7 °C.In 2021, Krista Myers led a paper which surveyed 2780 Earth scientists. Depending on expertise, between 91% (all scientists) to 100% (climate scientists with high levels of expertise, 20+ papers published) agreed human activity is causing climate change. Among the total group of climate scientists, 98.7% agreed. The agreement was lowest among scientists who chose Economic Geology as one of their fields of research (84%).
Also in 2021, a team led by Mark Lynas had found 80,000 climate-related studies published between 2012 and 2020, and chose to analyse a random subset of 3000. Four of these were skeptical of the human cause of climate change, 845 were endorsing the human cause perspective at different levels, and 1869 were indifferent to the question. The authors estimated the proportion of papers not skeptical of the human cause as 99.85% (95% confidence limit 99.62%–99.96%). Excluding papers which took no position on the human cause led to an estimate of the proportion of consensus papers as 99.53% (95% confidence limit 98.80%–99.87%). They confirmed their numbers by explicitly looking for alternative hypotheses in the entire dataset, which resulted in 28 papers.
See also
- Climate change denial
- History of climate change science
- List of climate change controversies
- List of climate scientists
- World Scientists' Warning to Humanity
References
- ^ IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York City, US, pp. 3–32, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.001.
- ^ Marvel, K., W. Su, R. Delgado, S. Aarons, A. Chatterjee, M.E. Garcia, Z. Hausfather, K. Hayhoe, D.A. Hence, E.B. Jewett, A. Robel, D. Singh, A. Tripati, and R.S. Vose, 2023: Chapter 2. Climate trends. In: Fifth National Climate Assessment. Crimmins, A.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA. doi:10.7930/NCA5.2023.CH2
- "Total radiative forcing is positive and has led to an uptake of energy by the climate system. The largest contribution to total radiative forcing is caused by the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 since 1750." and "From 1750 to 2011, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production have released 375 GtC to the atmosphere, while deforestation and other land-use change are estimated to have released 180 GtC." In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
- ^ Myers, Krista F.; Doran, Peter T.; Cook, John; Kotcher, John E.; Myers, Teresa A. (20 October 2021). "Consensus revisited: quantifying scientific agreement on climate change and climate expertise among Earth scientists 10 years later". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (10): 104030. Bibcode:2021ERL....16j4030M. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774. S2CID 239047650.
- John Cook; et al. (April 2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002.
- ^ Powell, James Lawrence (20 November 2019). "Scientists Reach 100% Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 37 (4): 183–184. doi:10.1177/0270467619886266. S2CID 213454806. Retrieved 15 November 2020.
- ^ Lynas, Mark; Houlton, Benjamin Z.; Perry, Simon (19 October 2021). "Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (11): 114005. Bibcode:2021ERL....16k4005L. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966. S2CID 239032360.
- Benestad, Rasmus E.; Nuccitelli, Dana; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Hayhoe, Katharine; Hygen, Hans Olav; van Dorland, Rob; Cook, John (1 November 2016). "Learning from mistakes in climate research". Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 126 (3): 699–703. Bibcode:2016ThApC.126..699B. doi:10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5. ISSN 1434-4483.
- "Joint Science Academies' Statement" (PDF). 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-09-09. Retrieved 2014-04-20.
It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001). This warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate.
- "'Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.' IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Working Group I, Summary for Policymakers. 'The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.'" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 October 2018. Retrieved 26 December 2018.
- Julie Brigham-Grette; et al. (September 2006). "Petroleum Geologists' Award to Novelist Crichton Is Inappropriate". Eos. 87 (36): 364. Bibcode:2006EOSTr..87..364B. doi:10.1029/2006EO360008.
The AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming.
- DiMento, Joseph F. C.; Doughman, Pamela M. (2007). Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren. The MIT Press. p. 68. ISBN 978-0-262-54193-0.
- Stoddard, Isak; Anderson, Kevin; Capstick, Stuart; Carton, Wim; Depledge, Joanna; Facer, Keri; Gough, Clair; Hache, Frederic; Hoolohan, Claire; Hultman, Martin; Hällström, Niclas; Kartha, Sivan; Klinsky, Sonja; Kuchler, Magdalena; Lövbrand, Eva; Nasiritousi, Naghmeh; Newell, Peter; Peters, Glen P.; Sokona, Youba; Stirling, Andy; Stilwell, Matthew; Spash, Clive L.; Williams, Mariama; et al. (18 October 2021). "Three Decades of Climate Mitigation: Why Haven't We Bent the Global Emissions Curve?". Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 46 (1): 653–689. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-011104. hdl:1983/93c742bc-4895-42ac-be81-535f36c5039d. ISSN 1543-5938. S2CID 233815004. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
- Mann, Michael E.; Toles, Tom (2016). The Madhouse Effect. New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press. doi:10.7312/mann17786. ISBN 978-0231541817.
- Oreskes, Naomi; Conway, Erik (2012). Merchants of doubt : how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-1408824832. OCLC 934374946.
- "Public perceptions on climate change" (PDF). PERITIA Trust EU – The Policy Institute of King's College London. June 2022. p. 4. Archived (PDF) from the original on 15 July 2022.
- Powell, James (20 November 2019). "Scientists Reach 100% Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 37 (4): 183–184. doi:10.1177/0270467619886266. S2CID 213454806.
- Lynas, Mark; Houlton, Benjamin Z.; Perry, Simon (19 October 2021). "Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (11): 114005. Bibcode:2021ERL....16k4005L. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966. S2CID 239032360.
- Myers, Krista F.; Doran, Peter T.; Cook, John; Kotcher, John E.; Myers, Teresa A. (20 October 2021). "Consensus revisited: quantifying scientific agreement on climate change and climate expertise among Earth scientists 10 years later". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (10): 104030. Bibcode:2021ERL....16j4030M. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774. S2CID 239047650.
- ^ Climate Change to the Year 2000: A Survey of Expert Opinion (PDF) (Report). February 1978.
- ^ Stewart, Thomas R.; Mumpower, Jeryl L.; Reagan-Cirincione, Patricia (April 1992). Scientists' Agreement and Disagreement about Global Climate Change: Evidence from Surveys (PDF) (Report).
- ^ Bray, Dennis; Hans von Storch (1999). "Climate Science: An Empirical Example of Postnormal Science" (PDF). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 80 (3): 439–455. Bibcode:1999BAMS...80..439B. doi:10.1175/1520-0477(1999)080<0439:CSAEEO>2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1520-0477.
- Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; Verheggen, Bart; Maibach, Ed W.; Carlton, J. Stuart; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Skuce, Andrew G.; Green, Sarah A.; Nuccitelli, Dana; Jacobs, Peter; Richardson, Mark; Winkler, Bärbel; Painting, Rob; Rice, Ken (2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002. ISSN 1748-9326.
- Oreskes, Naomi (2007). "The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We're Not Wrong?". In DiMento, Joseph F. C.; Doughman, Pamela M. (eds.). Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren. MIT Press. pp. 65–66. ISBN 978-0-262-54193-0.
- "ACIA Display". Amap.no. Archived from the original on 14 December 2010. Retrieved 30 July 2012.
- "Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly". UNEP/GRID-Arendal. 8 November 2004. Retrieved 20 January 2010.
- "US Government Agencies Participating in the USGCRP". Agencies. USGCRP. 20 October 2008. Retrieved November 23, 2018.
- Christensen, Jen; Nedelman, Michael (November 23, 2018). "Climate change will shrink US economy and kill thousands, government report warns". CNN. Retrieved November 23, 2018.
- "About the IPCC". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved 22 February 2019.
- "UN General Assembly Resolution 43/53 "Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind"" (PDF). UN General Assembly Resolutions 43rd Session 1988–1989. United Nations.
- "Annex C to Appendix C to the Principles Governing IPCC Work". IPCC Procedures. IPCC.
- "The IPCC: Who Are They and Why Do Their Climate Reports Matter?". Union of Concerned Scientists: Reports & Multimedia - Activist Resources: Explainers. Union of Concerned Scientists. 11 October 2018.
- Australian Academy of Science; Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts; Brazilian Academy of Sciences; Royal Society of Canada; Caribbean Academy of Sciences; Chinese Academy of Sciences; French Academy of Sciences; German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina; Indian National Science Academy; Indonesian Academy of Sciences; Royal Irish Academy; Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy); Academy of Sciences Malaysia; Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand; Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; Turkish Academy of Sciences; Royal Society (UK) (18 May 2001). "The Science of Climate Change". Science. 292 (5520). Science Magazine: 1261. doi:10.1126/science.292.5520.1261. PMID 11360966.
- "Joint Science Academies' Statement" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-09-09. Retrieved 2006-08-30.
- "Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC) to the G8 on sustainability, energy efficiency and climate change". Network of African Science Academies. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 June 2017. Retrieved 28 August 2012.
- "INQUA Statement On Climate Change" (PDF).
- Cook, John; Nuccitelli, Dana; Green, Sarah A.; Richardson, Mark; Winkler, Bärbel; Painting, Rob; Way, Robert; Jacobs, Peter; Skuce, Andrew (15 May 2013). "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature". Environ. Res. Lett. 8 (2). IOP Publishing Ltd.: 024024. Bibcode:2013ERL.....8b4024C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024.
- "Scientific and Public Perspectives on Climate Change / Scientists' vs. Public Understanding of Human-Caused Global Warming". climatecommunication.yale.edu. Yale University. 29 May 2013. Archived from the original on 17 April 2019.
- Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; Verheggen, Bart; Maibach, Ed W.; Carlton, J. Stuart; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Skuce, Andrew G.; Green, Sarah A. (2016), "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming", Environmental Research Letters, 11 (44): 048002, Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002048002
- "The NOAA Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI)". NOAA.gov. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2024. Archived from the original on 5 October 2024.
- "List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations". California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. Archived from the original on 23 February 2024. Retrieved 10 August 2024.
- "Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I – Chapter 3: Detection and Attribution of Climate Change". science2017.globalchange.gov. U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP): 1–470. 2017. Archived from the original on 23 September 2019. Adapted directly from Fig. 3.3.
- Wuebbles, D.J.; Fahey, D.W.; Hibbard, K.A.; Deangelo, B.; Doherty, S.; Hayhoe, K.; Horton, R.; Kossin, J.P.; Taylor, P.C.; Waple, A.M.; Yohe, C.P. (23 November 2018). "Climate Science Special Report / Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4), Volume I /Executive Summary / Highlights of the Findings of the U.S. Global Change Research Program Climate Science Special Report". globalchange.gov. U.S. Global Change Research Program: 1–470. doi:10.7930/J0DJ5CTG. Archived from the original on 14 June 2019.
- Roper, Willem (25 January 2021). "Global Warming Chart – Here's How Temperatures Have Risen Since 1950". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
- Slade, David H. (1989). "A survey of informed opinion regarding the nature and reality of a 'global greenhouse warming'". Climatic Change. 16: 1–4. doi:10.1007/BF00137342. S2CID 153884762.
- GECR climate survey shows strong agreement on action, less so on warming (Report). Vol. 2. Global Environmental Change Report. 1990. pp. 1–3.
- "World warming at record 0.2 C per decade, scientists warn". Phys.org. Retrieved 23 November 2023.
- ^ Bray, Dennis; Storch, Hans von. "Climate Scientists' Perceptions of Climate Change Science" (PDF). GKSS Report 11/2007.
- "Climate scientists' views on climate change: a survey". Nature Climate Change. 8 August 2007. Archived from the original on 13 January 2012.
- Naomi Oreskes (3 December 2004). "Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change" (PDF). Science. 306 (5702): 1686. doi:10.1126/science.1103618. PMID 15576594. S2CID 153792099.
- Lichter, S. Robert (24 April 2008). "Climate Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Don't Trust the Media's Coverage of Climate Change". Statistical Assessment Service, George Mason University. Archived from the original on 11 January 2010. Retrieved 20 January 2010.
- ""Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change"". Journalist's Resource.org.
- Stephen J. Farnsworth; S. Robert Lichter (27 October 2011). "The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change". International Journal of Public Opinion Research. Archived from the original on 11 March 2013. Retrieved 2 December 2011.
- Lavelle, Marianne (23 April 2008). "Survey Tracks Scientists' Growing Climate Concern". U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved 20 January 2010.
- Bray, Dennis; von Storch, Hans (2010). "A Survey of the Perspectives of Climate Scientists Concerning Climate Science and Climate Change" (PDF).
- Bray, Dennis (August 2010). "The scientific consensus of climate change revisited" (PDF). Environmental Science & Policy. 13 (5): 340–350. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.04.001., copy online at
- Bray, D.; von Storch H. (2009). "Prediction' or 'Projection; The nomenclature of climate science" (PDF). Science Communication. 30 (4): 534–543. doi:10.1177/1075547009333698. S2CID 145338218.
- "Ice sheet melt on track with 'worst-case climate scenario'". www.esa.int. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
- Slater, Thomas; Hogg, Anna E.; Mottram, Ruth (31 August 2020). "Ice-sheet losses track high-end sea-level rise projections". Nature Climate Change. 10 (10): 879–881. Bibcode:2020NatCC..10..879S. doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0893-y. ISSN 1758-6798. S2CID 221381924. Archived from the original on 2 September 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
- Grinsted, Aslak; Christensen, Jens Hesselbjerg (2021-02-02). "The transient sensitivity of sea level rise". Ocean Science. 17 (1): 181–186. Bibcode:2021OcSci..17..181G. doi:10.5194/os-17-181-2021. hdl:11250/3135359. ISSN 1812-0784. S2CID 234353584.
- Fox-Kemper, B.; Hewitt, H.T.; Xiao, C.; Aðalgeirsdóttir, G.; Drijfhout, S.S.; Edwards, T.L.; Golledge, N.R.; Hemer, M.; Kopp, R.E.; Krinner, G.; Mix, A. (2021). Masson-Delmotte, V.; Zhai, P.; Pirani, A.; Connors, S.L.; Péan, C.; Berger, S.; Caud, N.; Chen, Y.; Goldfarb, L. (eds.). "Chapter 9: Ocean, Cryosphere and Sea Level Change" (PDF). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, US: 1302.
- Doran, Peter T.; Zimmerman, Maggie Kendall (20 January 2009). "Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change". EOS. 90 (3): 22–23. Bibcode:2009EOSTr..90...22D. doi:10.1029/2009EO030002. S2CID 128398335.
- William R. L. Anderegg; James W. Prall; Jacob Harold & Stephen H. Schneider (April 9, 2010). "Expert credibility in climate change". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107 (27): 12107–12109. Bibcode:2010PNAS..10712107A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107. PMC 2901439. PMID 20566872.
- Scientists 'Convinced' of Climate Consensus More Prominent Than Opponents, Says Paper by Eli Kintisch, "Science Insider", Science, 21 June 2010
- ""Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change" at Journalist's Resource.org".
- ^ Stephen J. Farnsworth; S. Robert Lichter (27 October 2011). "The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change". International Journal of Public Opinion Research. 24: 93–103. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edr033. Retrieved 2 December 2011. Paywalled; full test online here, retrieved 30 November 2014. From Table I, "Q: In your opinion, is human-induced greenhouse warming now occurring?" Yes, 84%. No, 5%. Don't Know, 12%
- Powell, James Lawrence (15 November 2012), "The State of Climate Science: A Thorough Review of the Scientific Literature on Global Warming", Science Progress, retrieved 21 September 2016
- Powell, James Lawrence (2011). The Inquisition of Climate Science. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-15718-6.
- Plait, P. (11 December 2012). "Why Climate Change Denial Is Just Hot Air". Slate. Retrieved 12 June 2014.
- Sheppard, Kate (1 December 2012). "CHART: Only 0.17 Percent of Peer-Reviewed Papers Question Global Warming". Mother Jones. Retrieved 12 February 2014.
- Plait, P. (14 January 2014). "The Very, Very Thin Wedge of Denial". Slate. Retrieved 12 June 2014.
- Gertz, Emily (10 January 2014). "Infographic: Scientists Who Doubt Human-Caused Climate Change". Popular Science. Retrieved 12 February 2014.
- The study in question was: Avakyan, S. V. (2013). "The role of solar activity in global warming". Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 83 (3): 275–285. Bibcode:2013HRuAS..83..275A. doi:10.1134/S1019331613030015. S2CID 154047107.
- Bray, Dennis; von Storch, Hans (2014). "A survey of the perceptions of climate scientists 2013" (PDF).
- ^ Cook, John; Dana Nuccitelli; Sarah A Green; Mark Richardson; Bärbel Winkler; Rob Painting; Robert Way; Peter Jacobs; Andrew Skuce (May 2013). "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 8 (2): 024024. Bibcode:2013ERL.....8b4024C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024.
- Oreskes 2007, p. 72: " generally focus their discussions on questions that are still disputed or unanswered rather than on matters about which everyone agrees"
- Verheggen, Bart; Strengers, Bart; Cook, John; van Dorland, Rob; Vringer, Kees; Peters, Jeroen; Visser, Hans; Meyer, Leo (19 August 2014). "Scientists' Views about Attribution of Global Warming". Environmental Science & Technology. 48 (16): 8963–8971. Bibcode:2014EnST...48.8963V. doi:10.1021/es501998e. PMID 25051508.
- Verheggen, Bart; Strengers, Bart; Vringer, Kees; Cook, John; Dorland, Rob van; Peters, Jeroen; Visser, Hans; Meyer, Leo (2 December 2014). "Reply to Comment on "Scientists' Views about Attribution of Global Warming"". Environmental Science & Technology. 48 (23): 14059–14060. Bibcode:2014EnST...4814059V. doi:10.1021/es505183e. ISSN 0013-936X. PMID 25405594.
- ^ Powell, James Lawrence (24 May 2017). "The Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming Matters". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 36 (3): 157–163. doi:10.1177/0270467617707079. S2CID 148618842.
- Benestad, Rasmus E.; Nuccitelli, Dana; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Hayhoe, Katharine; Hygen, Hans Olav; van Dorland, Rob; Cook, John (November 2016). "Learning from mistakes in climate research". Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 126 (3–4): 699–703. Bibcode:2016ThApC.126..699B. doi:10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5. ISSN 0177-798X.
- Tol, Richard S J (1 April 2016). "Comment on 'Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature'". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4). IOP Publishing: 048001. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8001T. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048001. ISSN 1748-9326.
- Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; Verheggen, Bart; Maibach, Ed W.; Carlton, J. Stuart; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Skuce, Andrew G.; Green, Sarah A.; Nuccitelli, Dana (April 2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002. ISSN 1748-9326.
- Bray, Dennis; von Storch, Hans (2016). "The Bray and von Storch 5th International Survey of Climate Scientists 2015/2016". doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.11802.85443.
- Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; et al. (2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002.
- ^ Carrington, Damian (8 May 2024). "World's top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 9 May 2024. Replies were received from 380 of 843 scientists believed to have been contacted.
- Ramanujan, Krishna. "More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change". Cornell Chronicle. Environmental Research Letters. Retrieved 20 October 2021.