List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming
||The lead section of this article may need to be rewritten. (October 2014)|
This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict with the mainstream scientific understanding of global warming as summarized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other scientific bodies.
The scientific consensus is that the global average surface temperature has risen over the last century. The scientific consensus and scientific opinion on climate change were summarized in the 2001 Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The main conclusions on global warming were as follows:
- The global average surface temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and 0.17 °C per decade in the last 30 years.
- "There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities", in particular emissions of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane.
- If greenhouse gas emissions continue the warming will also continue, with temperatures projected to increase by 1.4 °C to 5.8 °C between 1990 and 2100.[A] Accompanying this temperature increase will be increases in some types of extreme weather and a projected sea level rise. The balance of impacts of global warming become significantly negative at larger values of warming.
These findings are recognized by the national science academies of all the major industrialized nations.
There have been several efforts to compile lists of dissenting scientists, including a 2008 US senate minority report, the Oregon Petition, and a 2007 list by the Heartland Institute, all three of which have been criticized on a number of grounds.
Each scientist listed here has published at least one peer-reviewed article in the broad field of natural sciences, although not necessarily in a field relevant to climatology.[B] Since the publication of the IPCC Third Assessment Report, each has made a clear statement in his or her own words (as opposed to the name being found on a petition, etc.) disagreeing with one or more of the report's three main conclusions. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles. As of August 2012[update], fewer than 10 of the statements in the references for this list are part of the peer-reviewed scientific literature. The rest are statements from other sources such as interviews, opinion pieces, online essays and presentations.
- 1 Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections
- 2 Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes
- 3 Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown
- 4 Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences
- 5 Dead scientists
- 6 See also
- 7 Notes
- 8 References
- 9 Further reading
- 10 External links
Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections
These scientists have said that it is not possible to project global climate accurately enough to justify the ranges projected for temperature and sea-level rise over the next century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global climate modeling.
- David Bellamy, botanist.
- Judith Curry, Professor and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
- Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society 
- Steven E. Koonin, theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University
- Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences
- Craig Loehle, ecologist and chief scientist at the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement.
- Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003)
- Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian National University
- Denis Rancourt, former professor of physics at University of Ottawa, research scientist in condensed matter physics, and in environmental and soil science
- Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
- Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London
- Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute 
- Anastasios Tsonis, distinguished professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
- Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry
- Zbigniew Jaworowski, physician and ice core researcher.
Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes
These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.
- Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences
- Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
- Timothy Ball, professor emeritus of geography at the University of Winnipeg
- Robert M. Carter, former head of the school of earth sciences at James Cook University
- Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
- Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland
- David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
- Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University
- William M. Gray, professor emeritus and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University
- William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy, Princeton University
- Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo
- Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.
- William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology
- David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware
- Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri
- Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
- Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.
- Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of mining geology, the University of Adelaide.
- Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego
- Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University
- Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University
- Tom Segalstad, geologist; associate professor at University of Oslo
- Nir Shaviv, professor of physics focusing on astrophysics and climate science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem
- Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia
- Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
- Roy Spencer, meteorologist; principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville
- Henrik Svensmark, physicist, Danish National Space Center
- George H. Taylor, retired director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University
- Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa
Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown
These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural.
- Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
- Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).
- Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.
- John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.
- Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.
- David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.
- Ivar Giaever, professor emeritus of physics at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and a Nobel laureate.
- Vincent R. Gray, New Zealand physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes
- Keith E. Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
- Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.
Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences
These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment.
- Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 
- Sherwood B. Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and adjunct professor, Arizona State University
- Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia
This section includes deceased scientists who would otherwise be listed in the prior sections.
- August H. "Augie" Auer Jr. (1940–2007), retired New Zealand MetService Meteorologist and past professor of atmospheric science at the University of Wyoming
- Reid Bryson (1920–2008), Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, said in a 2007 magazine interview that he believed global warming was primarily caused by natural processes:
- Robert Jastrow (1925–2008) was an American astronomer, physicist and cosmologist. He was a leading NASA scientist. Together with Fred Seitz and William Nierenberg he established the George C. Marshall Institute to counter the scientists who were arguing against Reagan's Starwars Initiative, arguing for equal time in the media. This institute later took the view that tobacco was having no effect, that acid rain was not caused by human emissions, that ozone was not depleted by CFCs, that pesticides were not environmentally harmful and it was also critical of the consensus view of anthropogenic global warming. Jastrow acknowledged the Earth was experiencing a warming trend, but claimed that the cause was likely to be natural variation.
- Marcel Leroux (1938–2008) former Professor of Climatology, Université Jean Moulin
- Frederick Seitz (1911–2008), solid-state physicist and former president of the National Academy of Sciences and co-founder of the George C. Marshall Institute in 1984.
- Environmental skepticism
- Global warming controversy
- List of authors from the IPCC AR4 WGI report
- List of climate scientists
- Merchants of Doubt
- ^ In its 2007 assessment report, IPCC projected likely temperature rise for various hypothetical levels of future greenhouse gas emissions, known as "emissions scenarios". They reported that during the 21st century the global surface temperature is likely to rise a further 1.1 to 2.9 °C (2.0 to 5.2 °F) for the lowest emissions scenario used in the report, and 2.4 to 6.4 °C (4.3 to 11.5 °F) for the highest.
- ^ The compilation criteria for including scientists in the list is that they are relevant enough to have their own Wikipedia article, according to Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
- Anderegg, William R L; James W. Prall; Jacob Harold; Stephen H. Schneider (2010). "Expert credibility in climate change". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107 (27): 12107–9. Bibcode:2010PNAS..10712107A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107. PMC 2901439. PMID 20566872.
- Doran, Peter T.; Maggie Kendall Zimmerman (January 20, 2009). "Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change". EOS 90 (3): 22–23. Bibcode:2009EOSTr..90...22D. doi:10.1029/2009EO030002.
- Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis p.5 – IPCC
- Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis p.7 – IPCC
- Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis p.8 – IPCC
- Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability p.958 – IPCC
- "Joint Science Academies' Statement" (PDF). Retrieved August 9, 2010.
- Morano, Marc (11 December 2008). "U. S. Senate Minority Report: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims". Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
- "Global Warming Petition Project". Retrieved 2 March 2014.
- 500 Scientists Whose Research Contradicts Man-Made Global Warming Scares, by Dennis T. Avery. From the Heartland Institute website; published September 14, 2007, accessed June 20, 2008.
- Kaufman, Leslie (April 9, 2009). "Dissenter on Warming Expands His Campaign". New York Times.
- McKnight, David (August 2, 2008). "The climate change smokescreen". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved December 28, 2009.
- Grandia, Kevin (22 July 2009). "The 30,000 Global Warming Petition Is Easily-Debunked Propaganda". Huffington Post. Retrieved 2 March 2014.
- Global Warming? What a load of poppycock! by David Bellamy, Daily Mail 9 July 2004.
- Monbiot, George (2005-05-10), Junk Science, London: Guardian.co.uk, retrieved 2008-11-07
- Bellamy, David (2005-05-29), In an Adverse Climate, London: Times Online, retrieved 2008-11-07
- Curry, Judith A.; Webster, Peter J. (2011). "Climate Science and the Uncertainty Monster". Bureau of the American Meteorological Society 175: 1667–1682. doi:10.1175/2011BAMS3139.1.
- Curry, Judith A. (2010-11-17). "Statement to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment of the United States House of Representatives" (PDF). Retrieved 2014-10-25.
- Curry, Judith A. (2013-04-25). "Statement to the Subcommittee on Environment of the United States House of Representatives" (PDF). Retrieved 2014-10-25.
[The IPCC AR4] estimate of equilibrium climate sensitivity is not easily reconciled with recent forcing estimates and observational data. There is increasing support for values of climate sensitivity around or below 2°C.
- Mann, Michael E. (2014-10-17). "Curry Advocates Against Action on Climate Change". Retrieved 2014-10-25.
- Freeman Dyson, in correspondence with editor Steve Connor (February 25, 2011), "Letters to a heretic: An email conversation with climate change sceptic Professor Freeman Dyson", The Independent,
First, the computer models are very good at solving the equations of fluid dynamics but very bad at describing the real world. [...] Sixth, summing up the other five reasons, the climate of the earth is an immensely complicated system and nobody is close to understanding it.
- Epstein, Ethan (13 January 2014). "What Catastrophe?". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
Nor, of course, is he the only skeptic with serious scientific credentials... famed physicist Freeman Dyson are among dozens of scientists who have gone on record questioning various aspects of the IPCC’s line on climate change
- Koonin, Steven (September 2014). "Climate Science Is Not Settled". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 13 October 2014.
[Many open questions] are not ″minor″ issues to be ″cleaned up″ by further research. Rather, they are deficiencies that erode confidence in the computer projections. [...They are] fundamental challenges to our understanding of human impacts on the climate, and they should not be dismissed with the mantra that 'climate science is settled.' While the past two decades have seen progress in climate science, the field is not yet mature enough to usefully answer the difficult and important questions being asked of it.
- "Turn down heat on climate debate". Tampa Tribune. 23 September 2014.
- "The Climate Science Isn't Settled", The Wall Street Journal online, November 30, 2009,
Claims that climate change is accelerating are bizarre. [...] The quality of the data is poor [...] The general support for warming is based not so much on the quality of the data, but rather on the fact that there was a little ice age from about the 15th to the 19th century.
- "What Catastrophe?", The Weekly Standard, January 13, 2014
- Zedillo, Ernesto, ed. (2008). Global Warming: Looking Beyond Kyoto. Brookings Institution Press. pp. 21–. ISBN 0-8157-9716-8.
- Epstein, Ethan (13 January 2014). "What Catastrophe?". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
But Lindzen, plainly, is different. He can’t be dismissed. Nor, of course, is he the only skeptic with serious scientific credentials.
- Loehle, Craig. "Climate change: detection and attribution of trends from long-term geologic data". Ecological Modelling 171 (4): 433–450. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.08.013.
- Carter, Bob (20 January 2009). "Facts debunk global warming alarmism". The Australian. Retrieved 11 May 2014.
- Loehle, Craig (2007). "A 2000 Year Global Temperature Reconstruction based on Non-Tree ring Proxies". Energy & Environment 18 (7 & 8): 1049–1058.
- Milloy, Steven (21 November 2007). "U.N. Climate Distractions". Fox News Channel. Retrieved 13 February 2014.
A new temperature reconstruction for the past 2,000 years created by Craig Loehle of the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement indicates that, 1,000 years ago, globally averaged temperature was about 0.3 degrees Celsius warmer than the current temperature.
- Singer, S. Fred (9 January 2010). "Index of Editorials Global Warming Junkscience". Science and Environmental Policy Project. Retrieved 1 February 2014.
- "Skeptics, unite!". National Post. Retrieved 1 February 2014.
- Nils-Axel Mörner (Mar 30, 2005), Economics of Climate Change: 12-ii Session 2005–06 Evidence to Select Committee on Economic Affairs II, The Stationery Office, p. 269,
In conclusion, observational data do not support the sea level rise scenario. On the contrary, they seriously contradict it.
- Kelly, Jack. "The facts don’t add up for human-caused global warming". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
prominent skeptics...Nils-Axel Mörner
- Paltridge, Garth (2009). the Climate Caper. Connor Court Publishing. ISBN 978-1-921421-25-9.
There are good and straightforward scientific reasons to believe that the burning of fossil fuel and consequent increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide will lead to an increase in the average temperature of the world above that which would otherwise be the case. Whether the increase will be large enough to be noticeable is still an unanswered question.
- Bolt, Andrew (12 February 2010). "Warmists are hot under the collar as scepticism rules". Herald Sun. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
- "Denis Rancourt on climate science and on climate politics", Climate Guy blog, February 23, 2014
- Cockburn, A., "Dissidents Against Dogma", The Nation, 25 June 2007.
- "Inhofe reveals how scientists and activists believe global warming has ‘co-opted’ the environmental movement," US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, 26 October 2007 
- Newton, David E. Science and Political Controversy: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO. p. 156. ISBN 1610693191.
- Peter Stilbs and Åke Ortmark (12 January 2014), Expressen, gå inte på klimatbluffen,
IPCC gör ingen egen forskning, utan söker som grupp stöd för en given hypotes - att koldioxiden har en avgörande betydelse för jordens framtida klimat. Detta är egentligen ogörligt, då ingen ännu har klarlagt klimatsystemets naturliga variationer. Enligt de vetenskapliga principer som växt fram under hundratals år tyder de senaste 20 årens observationer snarare på att hypotesen är falsk. (Own translation to English: The IPCC does not make its own research, but is a group searching for a given hypothesis – that carbon dioxide is crucial for the earth’s future climate. This is actually impossible since nobody has yet clarifed the climate system’s natural variability. According to the scientific principles that have developed over hundreds of years, the last 20 years of observations rather indicate that the hypothesis is false.)
- "Enögt fokus på CO2-utsläpp leder fel" (in Swedish). Göteborgs-Posten. 1 February 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
- Global Warming Is Not A Crisis,
It is claimed, on the basis of computer models, that this should lead to 1.1 – 6.4 C warming. What is rarely noted is that we are already three-quarters of the way into this in terms of radiative forcing, but we have only witnessed a 0.6 (+/-0.2) C rise, and there is no reason to suppose that all of this is due to humans.
- Glasse, Jennifer (5 December 2009). "UN Panel to Investigate Claims Climate Change Scientists Suppressed Data". Voice of America. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
Philip Stott, a professor in biogeography at the University of London and a climate change skeptic
- Tennekes, Hendrik. "A Skeptical View of Climate Models".
The blind adherence to the harebrained idea that climate models can generate 'realistic' simulations of climate is the principal reason why I remain a climate skeptic.
- Timmer, Edwin (13 February 2010). "Het Gelijk Van Henk Tennekes" (in Dutch). De Telegraaf. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
- Roberts, John (30 September 2013). "UN's massive new climate report adds little explanation for 'pause' in warming". Fox News Channel. Retrieved 10 October 2014.
“I know that the models are not adequate,” Tsonis told Fox News. “There are a lot of climate models out there. They don’t agree with each other – and they don’t agree with reality.”
- Lee Bergquist and Thomas Content (25 March 2009). "Natural forces stalling global warming, UWM pair say". Retrieved 1 November 2014.
The findings of mathematicians Kyle L. Swanson and Anastasios Tsonis contradict the assumptions of many climate scientists... who say the planet is currently warming.
- "Breaking Global Warming Taboos: 'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'". Spiegel Online. 8 February 2012. Retrieved 19 February 2014.
CO2 alone will never cause a warming of more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century. Only with the help of supposed amplification effects, especially water vapor, do the computers arrive at a drastic temperature increase.
- Delingpole, James (16 June 2012). "It's no wonder the world's cooling on climate change". Daily Mail. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
leading German green - former activist and Hamburg state environment senator Prof Fritz Vahrenholt. The evidence for man-made global warming is looking shakier by the day, Germany's answer to Jonathon Porritt or George Monbiot admitted. Far more likely a culprit is the sun.
- Jaworowski, Z., 2007, CO2: The greatest scientific scandal of our time, EIR Science,pdf
- Jaworowski, Z., Winter 2003-2004, Solar cycles, not CO2, determine climate, 21st Century Science and Technology, pdf
- Jaworowski, Z. 1999, The Global Warming Foly, 21st Century Science and Technology, 7 (1), 31-41
- Jaworowski, Z., 1997, Another global warming fraud exposed. Ice core data show no carbon dioxide increase, 21st Century Science and Technology, pdf
- Jaworowski, Z., 1996, Reliability of Ice Core Records for Climatic Projections, In The Global Warming Debate (London: European Science and Environment Forum), p. 95.
- Meehl, G.A.; W.M. Washington, C.A. Ammann, J.M. Arblaster, T.M.L. Wigleym and C. Tebaldi (2004). "Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate". Journal of Climate 17: 3721–3727. Bibcode:2004JCli...17.3721M. doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<3721:CONAAF>2.0.CO;2.
- "Russian academic says CO2 not to blame for global warming". Russian International News Agency. 15 January 2007. Retrieved 24 August 2012.
Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases [...], but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and [...] growth in its intensity.
- "Change climate change!". Hindustan Times. 19 January 2010. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
A Russian astronomer named Khabibullo Abdusamatov from St Petersburg has predicted the next ice age will start between 2035 and 2045 due to a decline in solar activity
- Baliunas, Sallie (August 2002). "Warming Up to the Truth". The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
- Baliunas, Sallie; Willie Soon (22 August 2002). "Global Warming Science vs. Computer Model Speculation: Just Ask the Experts". Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
[T]he recent warming trend in the surface temperature record cannot be caused by the increase of human-made greenhouse gases in the air.
- Rowland, Christopher (5 November 2013). "Researcher helps sow climate-change doubt". Boston Globe. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
prominent climate-change doubter, Sallie Baliunas, who was studying variations in solar radiation
- Coren, Michael (13 February 2010). "Climatology expert threatened for climate change views". Toronto Sun. Retrieved 6 March 2014.
There has always been and always will be climate change, but it has very little to do with human activity and has nothing at all to do with pollution of course.
- Plumer, Bradford (7 February 2007). "The dire global cooling problem". The Guardian. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
global warming-skeptic Timothy Ball
- McLean, J. D.; de Freitas, C. R.; Carter, R. M. (2009). "Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature". Journal of Geophysical Research 114: D14104. Bibcode:2009JGRD..11414104M. doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.
- "A little warming, a lot of hysteria". Washington Times. 11 April 2006. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
professor [Robert Carter], writing in the London Daily Telegraph, does not dispute the evidence that we’re in an era of rising temperatures. Who does? But he suggests that man exhibits considerable hubris — insolence, even — if he imagines that he’s responsible.
- Ian Clark (March 22, 2004). "Letter to the editor of The Hill Times". Natural Resources Stewardship Project. Archived from the original on February 10, 2009. Retrieved August 26, 2011.
We know that [the sun] was responsible for climate change in the past, and so is clearly going to play the lead role in present and future climate change. And interestingly... solar activity has recently begun a downward cycle.
- Huberman, Joel A. (6 October 2007). "Skeptics need to be held to scientific standards, too". The Buffalo News. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
Harris and [Ian] Clark are global warming "skeptics."
- Chris de Freitas (May 9, 2006). "Chris de Freitas: Evidence must prevail". The New Zealand Herald. Archived from the original on May 23, 2006. Retrieved August 26, 2011.
To support the argument that carbon dioxide is causing [global warming], the evidence would have to distinguish between human-caused and natural warming. This has not been done.
- "Half of Kiwis doubt global warming: poll". New Zealand Herald. 18 January 2010. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
climate sceptic Chris de Freitas
- Phillip V Brennan (December 10, 2007). "New Study Explodes Human-Global Warming Story". Newsmax.com. Archived from the original on May 11, 2008. Retrieved August 26, 2011.
[...]observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming.
- Asten, Michael (29 December 2009). "More evidence CO2 not culprit". The Australian. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
- Easterbrook, Don (22–25 October 2006). "THE CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING AND PREDICTIONS FOR THE COMING CENTURY". Philadelphia Annual Meeting. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
Because the warming periods in these oscillations [of glaciers] occurred well before atmospheric CO
2 began to rise rapidly in the 1940s, they could not have been caused by increased atmospheric CO
2, and global warming since 1900 could well have happened without any effect of CO
2. If the cycles continue as in the past, the current warm cycle should end soon[...]
- "The views of retired geology professor Don Easterbrook are considered in the minority.". 26 March 2013. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
...global warming skeptic who argued that federal scientists have been manipulating climate data to inflate temperatures. The views of retired geology professor Don Easterbrook are considered in the minority.
- Achenbach, Joel (28 May 2006). "The Tempest". The Washington Post (Washington DC: WPC). ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 1 September 2012.
I am of the opinion that [global warming] is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people.
- "Hurricane predictor will update forecast Wednesday". The Washington Post. 27 September 2010. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
Gray - who has gotten attention lately for calling global warming a hoax
- Raymond Brusca (January 12, 2009). "Professor denies global warming theory".
[Global warming] probably has little to do with carbon dioxide, just like past warmings had little to do with carbon dioxide
- Epstein, Ethan (13 January 2014). "What Catastrophe?". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
Nor, of course, is he the only skeptic with serious scientific credentials... William Happer, professor of physics at Princeton... among dozens of scientists who have gone on record questioning various aspects of the IPCC’s line on climate change
- Halfdan Carstens (2013). "Klimatolog i hardt vær". Retrieved January 9, 2014.
Based on my own observations of how the climate varies naturally, I am skeptical of the CO2 hypothesis (own translation from Norwegian)
- Prestrud, Pal (18 October 2011). "Questionable climate debate" (in Norwegian). Aftenposten. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
- Wibjörn Karlén (January 7, 2010). "Lilla istiden kan redan vara här". Retrieved January 16, 2014.
[After a long time of studying climate variations, I have come to the conclusion that the space weather suggests that we are more likely heading towards a colder period than a warmer. (own translation from Swedish)
- "Skeptics from a range of scientific disciplines get louder in their opposition to doomsday claims". Orange County Register. 1 January 2008. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
- William Kininmonth, Climate Change: A Natural Hazard, archived from the original on August 28, 2007, retrieved August 26, 2011,
Natural variability of the climate system has been underestimated by IPCC and has, to now, dominated human influences.
- Shand, Adam (10 January 2013). "Heat likely to return despite southerlies - NATURE'S FURY -". The Australian. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
William Kininmonth, a noted climate change sceptic(Subscription required.)
- Legates, David (May 2006). "Climate Science: Climate Change and Its Impacts". National Center for Policy Analysis. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
About half of the warming during the 20th century occurred prior to the 1940s, and natural variability accounts for all or nearly all of the warming.
- Montgomery, Jeff (19 March 2013). "Climate change skeptics say 'sick' science distorts facts". USA Today. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
Professor David Legates of the University of Delaware, a former climatologist for the state, bluntly rejected leading climate change claims
- Silvey, Janese (5 March 2012). "Professor details role as climate consultant". Columbia Tribune. Retrieved 15 April 2014.
There's no doubt the climate is changing; that's a given," he said. "But the question is: What's causing it. Is it mankind alone, which a lot of people say? Is it some mix of man and nature? Or is it nature? I would say nature is mostly responsible. There may be a role for man in there somewhere, but how much, I don't know.
- Gerken, James (28 August 2014). "Utility-Sponsored Teacher Training At Mizzou Brings Climate Skepticism And Anti-EPA Message". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
- Robinson, Cindy (Spring 2005). "Global warning? Controversy heats up in the scientific community". Carleton University Magazine. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
There is no global warming due to human anthropogenic activities.
- Montgomery, Charles (12 August 2006). "Nurturing doubt about climate change is big business". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
Canada's most vocal climate skeptics...University of Ottawa lecturer Tad Murty
- Tom, Harris (June 12, 2006). "Global warming, Scientists, Al Gore climate change". Canada Free Press. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
There is no meaningful correlation between CO
2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame.
- Patterson, Timothy (June 2007). "Read the Sunspots". Financial Post.
- "He's in the hot seat". Edmonton Journal. 23 September 2007. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
The main driver of climate change, [Tim Patterson] believes, is a combination of solar changes (well-known cycles of the sun's intensity) as well as cosmic rays.
- "Wild weather ignites climate change debate". Australian Broadcasting Company - Lateline. Aug 2002 (US). Retrieved 31 August 2012.
Natural climate changes occur unrelated to carbon dioxide contents.Check date values in:
- Manning, Paddy (26 November 2012). "Roy Hill to push through pain". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
Mr Plimer, a noted climate sceptic
- Robinson, Arthur B. (1997). "Science Has Spoken: Global Warming is a Myth". Dow Jones & Company. Retrieved 18 February 2014.
we needn't worry about human use of hydrocarbons warming the Earth. We also needn't worry about environmental calamities, even if the current, natural warming trend continues: After all the Earth has been much warmer during the past 3,000 years without ill effects.
- Gaston, Christian (10 August 2013). "Former Peter DeFazio opponent Art Robinson elected to lead Oregon Republican Party". The Oregonian. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
Robinson, a chemist and outspoken skeptic of human-caused global warming
- Bolt, Andrew (3 August 2011). "New research: warmth produces these carbon dioxide concentrations". Herald Sun. Retrieved 2 April 2014.
Salby...suggests that its warmth which tends to produce more CO2, rather than vice versa - which, incidentally is the story of the past recoveries from ice ages.
- Darwall, Rupert (Summer 2014). "An Unsettling Climate". City Journal (New York City). Retrieved 30 October 2014.
Another dissenter, the American atmospheric physicist Murry Salby...
- "I cambi climatici e le loro cause, una discussione su alcuni punti chiave (Climate Change and Its Causes, A Discussion About Some Key Issues)". La Chimica e l'Industria. 2010. pp. 70–75. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
At least 60% of the warming of the Earth observed since 1970 appears to be induced by natural cycles which are present in the solar system. A climatic stabilization or cooling until 2030–2040 is forecast by the phenomenological model.
- "Scafetta webpage".
- Taylor, James (30 May 2013). "Global Warming Alarmists Caught Doctoring '97-Percent Consensus' Claims". Forbes. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
prominent, vigorous skeptic... Nicola Scafetta
- Segalstad, Tom. "What is CO
2 – friend or foe?". Retrieved July 4, 2009.
The IPCC's temperature curve (the so-called 'hockey stick' curve) must be in error [...] All measurements of solar luminosity and 14C isotopes show that there is at present an increasing solar radiation which gives a warmer climate
- Stratton, Allegra (20 November 2009). "Climate change denial MEP attacks church". The Guardian. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
Tom Segalstad, a Norwegian geologist who says human-released CO2 would not have a large effect on the climate
- Shaviv, Nir. "Prof Nir Shaviv: The influence of cosmic radiation on the climate!". European Institute for Climate and Energy. Retrieved 24 October 2014.
The story we hear from the IPCC is faulty in many respects
- Taylor, James (30 May 2013). "Global Warming Alarmists Caught Doctoring '97-Percent Consensus' Claims". Forbes. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
prominent, vigorous skeptic... Nir Shaviv
- Singer, S. Fred (April 22, 2005). "'Flat Earth Award' nominee's challenge to Chicken Littles". Christian Science Monitor.
The greenhouse effect is real. However, the effect is minute, insignificant, and very difficult to detect.
- "The Denial Machine (ABC Interview)". 2008.
- "Climate of Doubt". PBS Frontline. October 23, 2012.
- Mook, Dean (8 February 2014). "Connecting the dots for climate skeptics". The Roanoke Times. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
But, there are always skeptics. For one example among several, Fred Singer, retired University of Virginia professor of physics
- William J Cromie (April 24, 2003). "Global warming is not so hot: 1003 was worse, researchers find". Harvard University Gazette. Retrieved August 26, 2011.
there's increasingly strong evidence that previous research conclusions [...] may have been biased by underestimation of natural climate variations.
- Rowland, Christopher (5 November 2013). "Researcher helps sow climate-change doubt". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
Willie Soon is a hero of the skeptical movement
- "Testimony of Roy W. Spencer". before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. 22 July 2008. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
I predict that [scientists will realise] most of the climate change we have observed is natural, and that mankind’s role is relatively minor
- Bachelard, Michaellast (11 September 2011). "Majority report: why consensus is all the rage". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
Internationally, sceptics look to climatologist Dr Roy Spencer
- Svensmark, Henrik (2007). "Cosmoclimatology: a new theory emerges" (PDF). Astronomy & Geophysics 48 (1): 18–24. Retrieved December 19, 2011.
The case for anthropogenic climate change during the 20th century rests primarily on the fact that concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases increased and so did global temperatures. Attempts to show that certain details in the climatic record confirm the greenhouse forcing (e.g. Mitchell et al. 2001) have been less than conclusive. By contrast, the hypothesis that changes in cloudiness obedient to cosmic rays help to force climate change predicts a distinctive signal that is in fact very easily observed, as an exception that proves the rule.
- Nuccitelli, Dana (12 November 2013). "Cosmic rays fall cosmically behind humans in explaining global warming". The Guardian. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Institute is the main proponent of the hypothesis linking [comic rays] to global climate change
- Tomlinson, Stuart (21 February 2008). "Update: Controversial "State Climatologist" Steps Aside". OregonLive.com. Retrieved 20 March 2014.
Taylor said he believes climate change is a combination of natural factor and human factors. "I don't deny that human activities affect climate change," he said. "But I believe up to now, natural variations have played a more important role than human activities.
- Learn, Scott (26 January 2012). "Presentation by global warming skeptics draws big crowd in Portland". The Oregonian. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
- Veizer, Ján (2005). "Celestial Climate Driver: A Perspective from Four Billion Years of the Carbon Cycle". Geoscience Canada. 1 32. Retrieved 26 August 2012.
At this stage, two scenarios of potential human impact on climate appear feasible: (1) the standard IPCC model that advocates the leading role of greenhouse gases, particularly of CO
2, and (2) the alternative model that argues for celestial phenomena as the principal climate driver. The two scenarios are likely not even mutually exclusive, but a prioritization may result in different relative impact. Models and empirical observations are both indispensable tools of science, yet when discrepancies arise, observations should carry greater weight than theory. If so, the multitude of empirical observations favours celestial phenomena as the most important driver of terrestrial climate on most time scales, but time will be the final judge.
- "Esteemed Ottawa scientist says cosmic rays, not greenhouse gases, cause global warming". Ottawa Citizen. 16 March 2006. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
- Syun-Ichi, Akasofu (June 15, 2007). "On the Fundamental Defect in the IPCC’s Approach to Global Warming Research by Syun-Ichi Akasofu". Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. wordpress.com. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
[T]he method of study adopted by the International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) is fundamentally flawed, resulting in a baseless conclusion: Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations. Contrary to this statement ..., there is so far no definitive evidence that 'most' of the present warming is due to the greenhouse effect. ... [The IPCC] should have recognized that the range of observed natural changes should not be ignored, and thus their conclusion should be very tentative. The term 'most' in their conclusion is baseless.
- Alford, Peter (14 March 2009). "Japanese scientists cool on theories". The Australian. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
Dr Akasofu and Tokyo Institute of Technology geology professor Shigenori Maruyama are highly critical of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's acceptance that hazardous global warming results mainly from man-made gas emissions.
- "Climat: la prévention, oui, la peur, non" (in French). L'Express. May 10, 2006. Archived from the original on November 17, 2006. Retrieved August 26, 2011.
:The increase in the CO
2 content of the atmosphere is an observed fact and mankind is most certainly responsible. In the long term, this increase will without doubt become harmful, but its exact role in the climate is less clear. Various parameters appear more important than CO
2. Consider the water cycle and formation of various types of clouds, and the complex effects of industrial or agricultural dust. Or fluctuations of the intensity of the solar radiation on annual and century scale, which seem better correlated with heating effects than the variations of CO
- Lean, Geoffrey (19 June 2009). "Conservatives have always been green". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
France's foremost climate sceptic, Claude Allègre
- Balling, Robert (September 2003). "The Increase in Global Temperature: What it Does and Does Not Tell Us". George C. Marshall Institute.
[I]t is very likely that the recent upward trend [in global surface temperature] is very real and that the upward signal is greater than any noise introduced from uncertainties in the record. However, the general error is most likely to be in the warming direction, with a maximum possible (though unlikely) value of 0.3 °C. ... At this moment in time we know only that: (1) Global surface temperatures have risen in recent decades. (2) Mid-tropospheric temperatures have warmed little over the same period. (3) This difference is not consistent with predictions from numerical climate models.
- Carroll, Vincent (20 June 2009). "Carroll: Skeptical of climate alarmists". The Denver Post. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
- Christy, John R.; Douglass, David H. (2009). "Limits on CO
2 Climate Forcing from Recent Temperature Data of Earth" (PDF). Energy & Environment 20: 177–189. doi:10.1260/095830509787689277. Retrieved June 17, 2011.
...the data show a small underlying positive trend that is consistent with CO
2 climate forcing with no-feedback. [...] There is disagreement in regard to the validity of the global warming hypothesis that states that there are positive feedback processes leading to gains g that are larger than 1, perhaps as large as 3 or 4. However, recent studies suggest that the values of g is much smaller.
- Christy, John (November 1, 2007). "My Nobel Moment". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 2, 2007.
...I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see. Rather, I see a reliance on climate models (useful but never "proof") and the coincidence that changes in carbon dioxide and global temperatures have loose similarity over time.
- Sullivansept, Margaret (6 September 2014). "Meant as Portraits, Seen as Hagiography". The New York Times. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
John Christy — a prominent climate-change skeptic
- Petr Chylek (April 2002). "A Long Term Perspective on Climate Change". Heartland.org. Archived from the original on September 29, 2007. Retrieved August 26, 2011.
Carbon dioxide should not be considered as a dominant force behind the current warming...how much of the [temperature] increase can be ascribed to CO
2, to changes in solar activity, or to the natural variability of climate is uncertain
- Borenstein, Seth (31 October 2011). "Noted skeptic finds climate change real". The Journal Gazette. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
Petr Chylek of Los Alamos National Lab, a noted skeptic
- Dr. David Deming (6 December 2006). "U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, Hearing Statements". epw.senate.gov. Retrieved 31 August 2012.
The amount of climatic warming that has taken place in the past 150 years is poorly constrained, and its cause – human or natural – is unknown. There is no sound scientific basis for predicting future climate change with any degree of certainty. If the climate does warm, it is likely to be beneficial to humanity rather than harmful. In my opinion, it would be foolish to establish national energy policy on the basis of misinformation and irrational hysteria.
- Davis, Tony (6 December 2009). "UA prof involved in Climategate replies to critics". Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
longtime warming skeptic David Deming
- Ivar Giaever (26 June 2011). "De forunderlige klimamytene". Retrieved 17 June 2013.
Therefore, it certainly is not likely that the temperature rise is due to CO2, because the correlation is weak.
- Jacoby, Jeff (25 September 2011). "Climate skeptics don’t ‘deny science’". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 28 October 2014.
Giaever is only one of many distinguished scientists who dissent from the alarmist view on climate change
- Gray, Vincent R. (April 2008). "The Global Warming Scam". Retrieved 13 February 2014.
- Barton, Chris (4 Nov 2006). "It's hype, hysteria and hot air says climate change nay-sayers". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 28 October 2014.
- Idso, Craig D., Idso, Keith E. (1998). "Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming". CO2science.org. Archived from the original on February 24, 2007. Retrieved 16 March 2014.
...there is no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature was caused by the rise in CO2. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that future increases in the air's CO2 content will produce any global warming; for there are numerous problems with the popular hypothesis that links the two phenomena.
- "U.S. House of Representatives Joint Hearing Before the Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and Regulatory Affairs of the Committee on Government Reform and the Subcommittee on Energy and the Enviroment of the Committee on Science: Is CO2 a Pollutant and does the EPA Have the Power to Regulate It?". United States Government Printing Office. 6 October 1999. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
- "ZENIT - Global Warming Natural, Says Expert". zenit.org. 2007-04-27. Retrieved August 31, 2012.
it is not possible to exclude the idea that climate changes can be due to natural causes
- Solomon, Lawrence (22 August 2013). "Lawrence Solomon: Model mockery?". National Post. Retrieved 28 October 2014.
climate change skeptics such as... Antonino Zichichi
- Craig Idso. "A Science- Based Rebuttal to the Testimony of Al Gore before the United States Senate Environment & Public Works Committee". Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. Retrieved 26 August 2012.
The rising CO
2 content of the air should boost global plant productivity dramatically, enabling humanity to increase food, fiber and timber production and thereby continue to feed, clothe, and provide shelter for their still-increasing numbers ... this atmospheric CO
2-derived blessing is as sure as death and taxes.
- Carpenter, Zoë (10 April 2014). "This Sham Report Is What the Climate Movement Is Up Against?". The Nation. Retrieved 28 October 2014.
climate change skeptic Craig Idso
- Sherwood B. Idso, Craig D. Idso and Keith E. Idso (November 2003). "Enhanced or Impaired? Human Health in a CO2-Enriched Warmer World". Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. p. 30. Retrieved 26 August 2012.
[W]arming has been shown to positively impact human health, while atmospheric CO
2 enrichment has been shown to enhance the health-promoting properties of the food we eat, as well as stimulate the production of more of it. ... [W]e have nothing to fear from increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO
2 and global warming.
- Gelbspan, Ross (March 22, 2001). "Bush's Global Warmers". The Nation. Retrieved 28 October 2014.
Sherwood Idso, a longtime coal-sponsored global warming skeptic
- Michaels, Patrick (October 16, 2003). "Posturing and Reality on Warming". CATO Institute. Retrieved June 10, 2009.
Scientists know quite precisely how much the planet will warm in the foreseeable future, a modest three-quarters of a degree (Celsius), plus or minus a mere quarter-degree ... a modest warming is a likely benefit... human warming will be strongest and most obvious in very cold and dry air, such as in Siberia and northwestern North America in the dead of winter.
- Gillis, Justin (10 February 2014). "Freezing Out the Bigger Picture". New York Times. Retrieved 28 October 2014.
Patrick J. Michaels, a climate skeptic at the Cato Institute
- Auer explains why he backs climate science coalition, New Zealand Press Association, April 30, 2006,
the global warming argument, particularly with all the disastrous consequences that are being promulgated ... this is all a non-sustainable argument. In other words the facts will, in time, prove them to be wrong
- "Wisconsin's Energy Cooperative". May 2007. Retrieved September 2012.
It’s absurd. Of course [temperature's] going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.
- Oreskes, Naomi; Conway, Erik M. (2010). Merchants of doubt : how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming (1st U.S. ed. ed.). New York: Bloomsbury Press. ISBN 9781596916104.
- Seitz, F. and Jastrow, R. (Dec 2001) Retrieved July 16, 2010 Do people cause global warming?
- Leroux, Marcel (2005). Global warming myth or reality : the erring ways of climatology. Berlin: Springer. p. 120. ISBN 354023909X.
The possible causes, then, of climate change are: well-established orbital parameters on the palaeoclimatic scale, ... solar activity, ...; volcanism ...; and far at the rear, the greenhouse effect, and in particular that caused by water vapor, the extent of its influence being unknown. These factors are working together all the time, and it seems difficult to unravel the relative importance of their respective influences upon climatic evolution. Equally, it is tendentious to highlight the anthropic factor, which is, clearly, the least credible among all those previously mentioned.
- Seitz, Frederick (1 December 2001). "Do people cause global warming?". Heartland Institute Environment News. Retrieved 25 August 2012.
"So we see that the scientific facts indicate that all the temperature changes observed in the last 100 years were largely natural changes and were not caused by carbon dioxide produced in human activities.
- WG1. "Chap 10, Executive Summary". IPCC.
- Boykoff, Maxwell (2009). "Ch. 39: Carbonundrums: The Role of the Media: Contemporary Media Courtesans: Climate Contrarians". In Schneider, Stephen H.; Rosencranz, Armin; Mastrandrea, Michael D. et al. Climate change science and policy. Island Press. p. 401. ISBN 978-1-59726-567-6.
- Fleming, James Rodger (2005). Historical Perspectives on Climate Change. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-518973-5.
- Oreskes, Naomi; Conway, Erik M. (2010). "The Denial of Global Warming". Merchants of Doubt. Bloomsbury. pp. 169–215. ISBN 978-1-59691-610-4.
- Solomon, Lawrence (2010). The Deniers. Richard Vigilante Books. ISBN 978-0-9800763-7-0.
- Powell, James Lawrence (2011). "The Scientist Deniers". The Inquisition of Climate Science. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-15718-6.
- Dunlap, Riley E.; McCright, Aaron M. (2011). "Ch. 10: Organized Climate Change Denial: 2.4 Contrarian Scientists". In Dryzek, John S.; Norgaard, Richard B.; Schlosber, David. The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford University Press. p. 151. ISBN 978-0-19-956660-0.
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — Consensus, mainstream assessment of climate change
- Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) — Compilation of some non-consensus views and study references