Climate Change Skeptics

If you think a climate skeptic has raised a legitimate scientific point or question, first check and see if it hasn't already been treated adequately at one of the following sites (9 times out of 10, there is already a good scientific answer to the question being asked):

• RealClimate
• How to talk to a climate skeptic
• The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
• Fact Check dot org

Also, the following sites maintain lists of climate skeptics and trace the sources of their funding (usually the oil or coal industry), their activities and offers rebbutals to their claims:

• DeSmogBlog.com
• Union of Concerned Scientists: skeptics page (they have several pages of analysis of "climate science contrarians")
• Wikipedia: climate skeptics page

Questions to ask yourself when you hear or see something that purports to "disprove" human caused global warming:

1. Is this person actually a climate scientist? Or are they an economist or journalist or a scientist working in a different field?
2. Is this a case where a journalist has felt compelled to produce an opposite view (for journalistic "integrity"), even though that view is outweighed 1000 to one by experts in the field? In other words, what is the majority view? Is what you are reading the one oddball out of thousands who think otherwise?^§
3. Follow the money. IPCC scientists are not paid a salary, only travel and living expenses while at the meeting. They would most likely relieve more money for further research if this issue was not settled but the majority say it is settled. Most anti-climate spokespersons and lobby groups receive money from the fossil fuel industry. They benefit from postponing any action which might restrict the use of fossil fuels so it is in their interest to confuse the issue.

^§For example an article in Science 306, no. 5702 (December 2004) p1686 counts 928 papers published in peer review science journals between 1993 and 2003 with the words 'Climate Change' in them. NONE of them disagree with the consensus that humans are causing climate change. A similar survey between 1988 and 2002 of media stories (non-scientific journals) about global warming counts 53% of the stories as giving equal weight to deniers of climate change (Global Environmental Change 14 (2004) p125). Articles in the popular press don't reflect the scientific consensus.

Following the money.

According to a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, "ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science."

James Hoggan in his book Climate Cover-up mentions the following organizations as being supported by the fossil fuel industry and deniers of human caused climate change (most are lobby or PR companies against cleaning up CO2 emissions). Feel free to verify or refute his claims: The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC); American Coalition for Clean Coal (ACCE); American Energy Power; American Enterprise Institute; American Petroleum Institute; Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC); Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate; Information Council on the Environment (ICE); Center for Energy and Economic Development (CEED); Competitive Enterprise Institute; ExxonMobil; Fraser Institute; Friends of Science; George C. Marshall Institute; Greening Earth Society; Frontiers of Freedom Institute; Global Climate Coalition; Heartland Institute; High Park Group; Intermountain Rural Electric Association; JunkScience.com; Natural Resources Stewardship Project; Australian Climate Science Coalition; New Zealand Climate Science Coalition; Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine; Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP); U.K. Scientific Alliance; Wester Fuels Association.

Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway in their book Merchants of Doubt document the role of a small group of scientists associated mainly with the George C. Marshall Institute in diseminating misleading and false data about human caused climate change. The George C. Marshall Institute (which has recieved money from Exxon-Mobile) also worked with the tobacco industry to deny that smoking and second hand smoke cause cancer, lobby for the Stratigic Defense Initiative, and deny that CFCs caused the ozone hole.

There are around 30 scientific organizations (national and international) which have issued statements supporting the idea that humans are causing global warming: http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/13/221250/49

The deniers:

A list of scientists who oppose the mainstream scientific views on global warming can be found on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

Coments:

• There are fewer than 50 scientists listed (last time I checked). Not all of them are climate scientists and they don't agree with each other. The IPCC claims 2000+ climate scientists, all actively publishing scientific articles on climate, all experts in their field, all who agree that humans are causing climate change.
• Many of these skeptics have ties to the fossil fuel industry (don't take my word for it- look them up and find out).
• Wikipedia has other pages on climate conspiracy, etc. Take a look and see what you think, now that you know to follow the money.