Re: (OT) : Energy for a Strong America and a Healthy US Economy

On Jul 21, 11:46 am, D Peter Maus <DPeterM...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dave wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:41:29 -0400, dxAce wrote:

  Interesting that no one's talking about that pile of Saddam's
'fictional' yellowcake that ended up in Canada.
Yeah via D{e@o G@r(}a , that place that should not be mentioned.

A pile of ore is not a weapon.  It is not a gathering threat.

http://www.dg.navy.mil/web/

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/diego-garcia.htm

   Denial is a marvelous thing.

Especially yours.
The OVERWHELMING majority of scientific opinion agrees that humans are
causing global warming, and that consensus is growing stronger with
every passing month,, quite to the contrary of your claims. You are
not as well read on science as you think in light of the overwhelming
disproof of your views below:


Note that "concurring" opinions support the view that humans are
causing the observed global warming, and "dissenting" bodies DO NOT
EXIST.



Scientific opinion on climate change
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

National and international science academies and professional
societies have assessed the current scientific opinion on climate
change, in particular recent global warming. These assessments have
largely followed or endorsed the IPCC position that "An increasing
body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and
other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger
evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is
attributable to human activities."[1]

This article documents scientific opinion as given by synthesis
reports, scientific bodies of national or international standing, and
surveys of opinion among climate scientists. It does not document the
views of individual scientists, individual universities or
laboratories, nor self-selected lists of individuals such as
petitions.
Energy portal
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Statements by concurring organizations
o 1.1 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
o 1.2 InterAcademy Council
o 1.3 Joint science academies' statement 2008
o 1.4 Joint science academies’ statement 2007
o 1.5 Joint science academies’ statement 2005
o 1.6 Joint science academies’ statement 2001
o 1.7 International Council of Academies of Engineering and
Technological Sciences
o 1.8 European Academy of Sciences and Arts
o 1.9 Network of African Science Academies
o 1.10 National Research Council (US)
o 1.11 European Science Foundation
o 1.12 American Association for the Advancement of Science
o 1.13 Federation of American Scientists
o 1.14 World Meteorological Organization
o 1.15 American Meteorological Society
o 1.16 Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
o 1.17 Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
o 1.18 Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
o 1.19 Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric
Sciences
o 1.20 International Union for Quaternary Research
o 1.21 American Quaternary Associati
o 1.22 Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of
London
o 1.23 International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
o 1.24 International Union of Geological Sciences
o 1.25 European Geosciences Union
o 1.26 Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences
o 1.27 Geological Society of America
o 1.28 American Geophysical Union
o 1.29 American Astronomical Society
o 1.30 American Institute of Physics
o 1.31 American Physical Society
o 1.32 American Chemical Society
o 1.33 Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers
Australia)
o 1.34 Federal Climate Change Science Program (US)
o 1.35 American Statistical Association
* 2 Noncommittal statements
o 2.1 American Association of State Climatologists
o 2.2 American Association of Petroleum Geologists
* 3 Statements by dissenting organizations
* 4 Scientific consensus
* 5 Surveys of scientists and scientific literature
o 5.1 Oreskes, 2004
o 5.2 Bray and von Storch, 2003
o 5.3 Survey of U.S. state climatologists 1997
o 5.4 Bray and von Storch, 1996
o 5.5 Other older surveys of scientists
* 6 See also
* 7 References
* 8 External links

Statements by concurring organizations

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007

Main article: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming
Fourth Assessment Report. According to this summary, the Fourth
Assessment Report finds that human actions are "very likely" the cause
of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability. Global
warming in this case is indicated by an increase of 0.75 degrees in
average global temperatures over the last 100 years.[2]

The New York Times reports on the report:

The world's leading climate scientists said global warming has
begun, is very likely caused by man, and will be unstoppable for
centuries, ... . The phrase very likely translates to a more than 90
percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of
fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it
nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.[3]

The report said that an increase in hurricane and tropical cyclone
strength since 1970 more likely than not can be attributed to man-made
global warming. The scientists said global warming's connection varies
with storms in different parts of the world, but that the storms that
strike the Americas are global warming-influenced.[4]

The Associated Press summarizes the position on sea level rise:

On sea levels, the report projects rises of 7-23 inches by the end
of the century. That could be augmented by an additional 4-8 inches if
recent surprising polar ice *** melt continues.[5]

InterAcademy Council

As the representative of the world’s scientific and engineering
academies,[6][7] the InterAcademy Council (IAC) issued a report in
2007 entitled Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future.

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.[8]

Concerted efforts should be mounted for improving energy
efficiency and reducing the carbon intensity of the world economy.[9]

Joint science academies' statement 2008

In preparation for the 34th G8 summit, 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 low carbon
society and to encourage and effect changes in individual and national
behaviour.”[10]

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.

Joint science academies’ statement 2007

In preparation for the 2007 G8 summit, the national science academies
of the G8+5 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 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 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 Earth 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.

Joint science academies’ statement 2005

In 2005 the national science academies of the G8 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[11], 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.

Joint science academies’ statement 2001

In 2001, following the publication of the IPCC Third Assessment
Report, sixteen national science academies issued a joint statement
explicitly acknowledging the IPCC position as representing the
scientific consensus on climate change science. The sixteen science
academies that issued the statement were those of Australia, Belgium,
Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, China, France, Germany, India,
Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the
United Kingdom.[12]

International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological
Sciences

In October 2007, the International Council of Academies of Engineering
and Technological Sciences (CAETS) issued a Statement on Environment
and Sustainable Growth[13]

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.

European Academy of Sciences and Arts

In March of 2007, the European Academy of Sciences and Arts issued a
formal declaration in which they stated, “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 extreme weather including droughts, heavy precipitation,
heat waves and the intensity of tropical cyclones. The above
development potentially has dramatic consequences for mankind’s
future. “[14]

Network of African Science Academies

In 2007, the Network of African Science Academies submitted a joint
“statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change”
to the leaders meeting at the G8 Summit in Heiligendamm, Germany.

“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.”[15]

The thirteen signatories were the science academies of Cameroon,
Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan,
Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, as well as the African Academy of
Sciences.

National Research Council (US)

In 2001, the Committee on the Science of Climate Change of the
National Research Council published Climate Change Science: An
Analysis of Some Key Questions [16]. This report explicitly endorses
the IPCC view of attribution of recent climate change as representing
the view of the scientific community:

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.[17]

European Science Foundation

The European Science Foundation has issued a Position Paper on climate
change in which they concur, "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." The paper concluded, "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."[18]

American Association for the Advancement of Science

In December of 2006, the American Association for the Advancement of
Science adopted an official statement on climate change in which they
stated, "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."[19]

Federation of American Scientists

In their Energy and Environment Overview, the Federation of American
Scientists state, “There is no serious doubt that human activity is
altering the earth's climate in potentially catastrophic ways. Even
skeptics are forced to admit that the risk is real and that prudence
demands action if only as an insurance policy, the only serious debate
is about how best to respond." [20]

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, the World
Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirms the need to “prevent
dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” The WMO
concurs that “scientific assessments have increasingly reaffirmed that
human activities are indeed changing the composition of the
atmosphere, in particular through the burning of fossil fuels for
energy production and transportation.” The WMO concurs that “the
present atmospheric concentration of CO2 was never exceeded over the
past 420,000 years;” and that the IPCC “assessments provide the most
authoritative, up-to-date scientific advice.” [21]

American Meteorological Society

The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their
council in 2003 said:

There is now clear evidence that the mean annual temperature at
the Earth's surface, averaged over the entire globe, has been
increasing in the past 200 years. There is also clear evidence that
the abundance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased over
the same period. In the past decade, significant progress has been
made toward a better understanding of the climate system and toward
improved projections of long-term climate change... Human activities
have become a major source of environmental change. Of great urgency
are the climate consequences of the increasing atmospheric abundance
of greenhouse gases... Because greenhouse gases continue to increase,
we are, in effect, conducting a global climate experiment, neither
planned nor controlled, the results of which may present unprecedented
challenges to our wisdom and foresight as well as have significant
impacts on our natural and societal systems.[22]

Royal Meteorological Society (UK)

In February 2007, after the release of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment
Report, the Royal Meteorological Society issued an endorsement of the
report. In addition to referring to the IPCC as “world’s best climate
scientists”, they stated that climate change is happening as “the
result of emissions since industrialization and we have already set in
motion the next 50 years of global warming – what we do from now on
will determine how worse it will get.” [23]

Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society

The Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society has issued a
Statement on Climate Change, wherein they conclude, “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 greenhouse effect. 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 deforestation and other human activity.”[24]

Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society

"CMOS endorses the process of periodic climate science assessment
carried out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and
supports the conclusion, in its Third Assessment Report, which states
that the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on
global climate."[25]

Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences

In November 2005, the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric
Sciences (CFCAS) issued a letter to the Prime Minister of Canada
stating that "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."[26]

International Union for Quaternary Research

The statement on climate change issued by the International Union for
Quaternary Research reiterates the conclusions of the IPCC, and urges
all nations to take prompt action in line with the UNFCCC principles.

“Human activities are now causing atmospheric concentrations of
greenhouse gasses - including carbon dioxide, methane, tropospheric
ozone, and nitrous oxide - to rise well above pre-industrial
levels….Increases in greenhouse gasses 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.” [27]

American Quaternary Association

The American Quaternary Association (AMQUA) has stated, “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.” [28]

Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London

The Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
stated, "We find that the evidence for human-induced climate change is
now persuasive, and the need for direct action compelling."[29]

International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics

In July of 2007, the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
(IUGG) adopted a resolution entitled “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
International Panel on Climate Change and regional and national
bodies, which have firmly established, on the basis of scientific
evidence, that human activities are the primary cause of recent
climate change.” They state further that the “continuing reliance on
combustion of fossil fuels as the world’s primary source of energy
will lead to much higher atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gasses, which will, in turn, cause significant increases in surface
temperature, sea level, ocean acidification, and their related
consequences to the environment and society.” [30]

International Union of Geological Sciences

In their Climate Change prospectus for the International Year of
Planet Earth project, the International Union of Geological Sciences
(IUGS) stated, “The idea that there is a strong human imprint on
recent climate change is now compelling, with forest clearing,
building and man-made gas emissions all having a strong influence on
Earth’s warming.”[31]

We know that human activity has resulted in changes to atmospheric
chemistry and land cover, and caused serious decline in biodiversity.
[32]

European Geosciences Union

In July 2005, the European Geosciences Union (EGU) issued a position
statement in support of the joint science academies’ statement on
global response to climate change. Additionally, the EGU concurred
that the IPCC “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 peer-reviewed scientific literature.” [33]

Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences

The Canadian Federation Of Earth Sciences has issued a position paper
on global climate change in which they state, “ Canada's Earth
scientists also recognize that humans are adding greenhouse gases
(GHGs) to our atmosphere at an ever increasing rate. 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….These could include: increased frequency and
severity of drought, coastal erosion, sea level change, permafrost
degradation, impact of reduced glacier cover on water resources,
groundwater quality and quantity, and occurrence of climate-related
natural hazards such as flooding, dust storms and landslides.”[34]

Geological Society of America

"The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports the scientific
conclusions that Earth’s climate is changing; the climate changes are
due in part to human activities; and the probable consequences of the
climate changes will be significant and blind to geopolitical
boundaries. Furthermore, the potential implications of global climate
change and the time scale over which such changes will likely occur
require active, effective, long-term planning."[35]

American Geophysical Union

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement [36] adopted by the
society in 2003 and revised in 2007 affirms that rising levels of
greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global
surface temperature to be warmer:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.
Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of
the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain
glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the
length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are
not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric
abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human
activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures
increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of
2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others
since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected
to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within
this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except
Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent
changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this
regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many
AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our
scientific understanding of the climate.

American Astronomical Society

The American Astronomical Society has endorsed the AGU statement:[37]

In endorsing the "Human Impacts on Climate" statement [issued by
the American Geophysical Union], 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.

American Institute of Physics

The Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics endorsed the
AGU statement on human-induced climate change:[38]

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.

American Physical Society

In November of 2007, the American Physical Society (APS) adopted an
official statement on climate change: "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."[39]

American Chemical Society

The American Chemical Society stated:

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). This statement
reviews key global climate change impacts and recommends actions
required to mitigate or adapt to currently anticipated consequences.
[40]

Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)

"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."[41]

Federal Climate Change Science Program (US)

On May 2, 2006, the Federal Climate Change Science Program
commissioned by the Bush administration in 2002 released the first of
21 assessments. Though it did not state what percentage of climate
change might be anthropogenic, the assessment concluded:

Studies ... show clear evidence of human influences on the climate
system (due to changes in greenhouse gases, aerosols, and
stratospheric ozone). ... The observed patterns of change over the
past 50 years cannot be explained by natural processes alone, nor by
the effects of short-lived atmospheric constituents (such as aerosols
and tropospheric ozone) alone.[42]

American Statistical Association

On November 30, 2007, the American Statistical Association Board of
Directors adopted a statement on climate change:

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.[43]

Noncommittal statements

American Association of State Climatologists

The 2001 statement from the American Association of State
Climatologists noted the difficulties with predicting impacts due to
climate change, while acknowledging that human activities are having
an effect on climate:

Climate prediction is difficult because it involves complex,
nonlinear interactions among all components of the earth’s
environmental system. (...) The AASC recognizes that human activities
have an influence on the climate system. Such activities, however, are
not limited to greenhouse gas forcing and include changing land use
and sulfate emissions, which further complicates the issue of climate
prediction. Furthermore, climate predictions have not demonstrated
skill in projecting future variability and changes in such important
climate conditions as growing season, drought, flood-producing
rainfall, heat waves, tropical cyclones and winter storms. These are
the type of events that have a more significant impact on society than
annual average global temperature trends. Policy responses to climate
variability and change should be flexible and sensible – The
difficulty of prediction and the impossibility of verification of
predictions decades into the future are important factors that allow
for competing views of the long-term climate future. Therefore, the
AASC recommends that policies related to long-term climate not be
based on particular predictions, but instead should focus on policy
alternatives that make sense for a wide range of plausible climatic
conditions regardless of future climate... Finally, ongoing political
debate about global energy policy should not stand in the way of
common sense action to reduce societal and environmental
vulnerabilities to climate variability and change. Considerable
potential exists to improve policies related to climate.[44]

American Association of Petroleum Geologists

The American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) Position
Statement on climate change states that "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."[45]

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.[46] Explaining the plan for a
revision, AAPG president Lee Billingsly wrote in March 2007 that
"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."[47]

Statements by dissenting organizations

With the July 2007 release of the revised statement by the American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, no remaining scientific body of
national or international standing is known to reject the basic
findings of human influence on recent climate.[46]

Scientific consensus

A question which frequently arises in popular discussion of climate
change is whether there is a scientific consensus. Several scientific
organizations have explicitly used the term "consensus" in their
statements:

* American Association for the Advancement of Science: "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."[19]
* US National Academy of Science: "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, [the
National Academies’ reports] have assessed consensus findings on the
science..."[48]
* Joint Science Academies' statement, 2005: "We recognise the
international scientific consensus of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC)."[49]
* 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."[50]
* American Meteorological Society: "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."[51]
* Network of African Science Academies: “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.” [52]

Surveys of scientists and scientific literature

Various surveys have been conducted to determine a scientific
consensus on global warming. Few have been conducted within the last
ten years.

Oreskes, 2004

A 2004 article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes
summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.[53]
The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the
reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928
abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and
2003, listed with the keywords "global climate change". Oreskes
divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the
consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals,
methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus
position. 75% of the abstracts were placed in the first three
categories, thus either explicitly or implicitly accepting the
consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no
position on current anthropogenic climate change; none of the
abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author
found to be "remarkable". According to the report, "authors evaluating
impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might
believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these
papers argued that point."

Bray and von Storch, 2003

A survey was conducted in 2003 by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch[54]
[55] Bray's submission to Science on December 22, 2004 was rejected,
but the survey's results were reported through non-scientific venues.
[56][57] The survey received 530 responses from 27 different
countries. One of the questions asked was "To what extent do you agree
or disagree that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic
causes?", with a value of 1 indicating strongly agree and a value of 7
indicating strongly disagree. The results showed a mean of 3.62, with
50 responses (9.4%) indicating "strongly agree" and 54 responses
(9.7%) indicating "strongly disagree". The same survey indicates a 72%
to 20% endorsement of the IPCC reports as accurate, and a 15% to 80%
rejection of the thesis that "there is enough uncertainty about the
phenomenon of global warming that there is no need for immediate
policy decisions."

The survey has been criticized on the grounds that it was performed on
the web with no means to verify that the respondents were climate
scientists or to prevent multiple submissions. The survey required
entry of a username and password, but the username and password were
circulated to a climate skeptics mailing list and elsewhere on the
internet.[58][59] Bray and von Storch defended their results[60] and
accused climate change skeptics of interpreting the results with bias.

Survey of U.S. state climatologists 1997

In 1997, the conservative think tank Citizens for a Sound Economy
surveyed America's 48 state climatologists on questions related to
climate change[61]. Of the 36 respondents, 44% considered global
warming to be a largely natural phenomenon, compared to 17% who
considered warming to be largely man-made. The survey further found
that 58% disagreed or somewhat disagreed with then-President Clinton's
assertion that "the overwhelming balance of evidence and scientific
opinion is that it is no longer a theory, but now fact, that global
warming is for real". Eighty-nine percent agreed that "current science
is unable to isolate and measure variations in global temperatures
caused ONLY by man-made factors," and 61% said that historical data do
not indicate "that fluctuations in global temperatures are
attributable to human influences such as burning fossil fuels."

Sixty percent of the respondents said that reducing man-made CO2
emissions by 15% below 1990 levels would not prevent global
temperatures from rising, and 86% said that reducing emissions to 1990
levels would not prevent rising temperatures. Thirty nine percent
agreed and 33% disagreed that "evidence exists to suggest that the
earth is headed for another glacial period,"[62] though the time scale
for the next glacial period was not specified.

Bray and von Storch, 1996

In 1996, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch undertook a survey of climate
scientists on attitudes towards global warming and related matters.
The results were subsequently published in the Bulletin of the
American Meteorological Society.[63] The paper addressed the views of
climate scientists, with a response rate of 40% from a mail survey
questionnaire to 1000 scientists in Germany, the USA and Canada. Most
of the scientists believed that global warming was occurring and
appropriate policy action should be taken, but there was wide
disagreement about the likely effects on society and almost all agreed
that the predictive ability of currently existing models was limited.

The abstract says:

The international consensus was, however, apparent regarding the
utility of the knowledge to date: climate science has provided enough
knowledge so that the initiation of abatement measures is warranted.
However, consensus also existed regarding the current inability to
explicitly specify detrimental effects that might result from climate
change. This incompatibility between the state of knowledge and the
calls for action suggests that, to some degree at least, scientific
advice is a product of both scientific knowledge and normative
judgment, suggesting a socioscientific construction of the climate
change issue.

The survey was extensive, and asked numerous questions on many aspects
of climate science, model formulation, and utility, and science/public/
policy interactions. To pick out some of the more vital topics, from
the body of the paper:

The resulting questionnaire, consisting of 74 questions, was pre-
tested in a German institution and after revisions, distributed to a
total of 1,000 scientists in North America and Germany... The number
of completed returns was as follows: USA 149, Canada 35, and Germany
228, a response rate of approximately 40%...

...With a value of 1 indicating the highest level of belief that
predictions are possible and a value of 7 expressing the least faith
in the predictive capabilities of the current state of climate science
knowledge, the mean of the entire sample of 4.6 for the ability to
make reasonable predictions of inter-annual variability tends to
indicate that scientists feel that reasonable prediction is not yet a
possibility... mean of 4.8 for reasonable predictions of 10 years...
mean of 5.2 for periods of 100 years...

...a response of a value of 1 indicates a strong level of
agreement with the statement of certainty that global warming is
already underway or will occur without modification to human
behavior... the mean response for the entire sample was 3.3 indicating
a slight tendency towards the position that global warming has indeed
been detected and is underway.... Regarding global warming as being a
possible future event, there is a higher expression of confidence as
indicated by the mean of 2.6.

Other older surveys of scientists

Note that the following surveys are over 15 years old. The state of
climate science and the beliefs of climate scientists have changed
radically since their time, as demonstrated by the reviews cited
above.

* Global Environmental Change Report, 1990: GECR climate survey
shows strong agreement on action, less so on warming. Global
Environmental Change Report 2, No. 9, pp. 1-3
* Stewart, T.R., Mumpower, J.L., and Reagan-Cirincione, P. (1992).
Scientists' opinions about global climate change: Summary of the
results of a survey. NAEP (National Association of Environmental
Professionals) Newsletter, 17(2), 6-7.
* In 1991, the Center for Science, Technology, and Media
commissioned a Gallup poll of 400 members of the American Geophysical
Union and the American Meteorological Society along with an analysis
of reporting on global warming by the Center for Media and Public
Affairs, a report on which was issued in 1992.[64] Accounts of the
results of that survey differ in their interpretation and even in the
basic statistical percentages:
o Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting states that the report
said that 67% of the scientists said that human-induced global warming
was occurring, with 11% disagreeing and the rest undecided.[65]
o George Will reported "53 percent do not believe warming
has occurred, and another 30 percent are uncertain." (Washington Post,
September 3, 1992). In a correction Gallup stated: "Most scientists
involved in research in this area believe that human-induced global
warming is occurring now."[66]
o A 1993 publication by the Heartland Institute reports: "A
Gallup poll conducted on February 13, 1992 of members of the American
Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society-the two
professional societies whose members are most likely to be involved in
climate research-found that 18 percent thought some global warming had
occurred, 33 percent said insufficient information existed to tell,
and 49 percent believed no warming had taken place."[67]

See also

* Scientific consensus
* Australian Medical Association position statement on climate
change, Sept. 21, 2005
* Global warming controversy
* National Registry of Environmental Professionals survey on
climate change
* List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment
of global warming

References

1. ^ Working Group 1, IPCC.
2. ^ "Warming 'very likely' human-made", BBC News, BBC
(2007-02-01). Retrieved on 2007-02-01.
3. ^ Science Panel Calls Global Warming ‘Unequivocal’ Rosenthal,
Elisabeth for The New York Times, February 2007
4. ^ On the Climate Change Beat, Doubt Gives Way to Certainty
Stevens, William for The New York Times, February 2007
5. ^ U.N. Report: Global Warming Man-Made, Basically Unstoppable
Fox News, February 2007
6. ^ New York Times Panel Urges Global Shift on Sources of Energy
7. ^ About IAC
8. ^ IAC report Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy
Future Forward
9. ^ IAC report Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy
Future 5.2 Conclusion
10. ^ US National Academies’ news page. See ‘’ Statement on Climate
Change’’.
11. ^ Joint science academies’ statement: Global response to climate
change June 2005
12. ^ The Science of Climate Change from www.royalsociety.org
13. ^ CAETS Statement on Environment and Sustainable Growth
14. ^ "Lets be Honest". European Academy of Sciences and Arts
(2007-03-03). Retrieved on 2008-04-01.
15. ^ "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). Retrieved on
2008-03-29.
16. ^ Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions
17. ^ Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions
18. ^ European Science Foundation Position Paper Impacts of Climate
Change on the European Marine and Coastal Environment - Ecosystems
Approach pp. 7-10
19. ^ a b AAAS Board Statement on Climate Change www.aaas.org
December 2006
20. ^ FAS web page, retrieved 3/25/08
21. ^ WMO’s Statement at the Twelfth Session of the Conference of
the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.
22. ^ Climate Change Research: Issues for the Atmospheric and
Related Sciences from www.ametsoc.org
23. ^ Royal Meteorological Society’s statement on the IPCC’s Fourth
Assessment Report.
24. ^ AMOS Statement on Climate Change
25. ^ Position Statement on Global Warming - Canadian Meteorological
and Oceanographic Society (Updated, 2007)
26. ^ CFCAS Letter to PM, November 25, 2005
27. ^ INQUA Statement On Climate Change.
28. ^ AMQUA “Petroleum Geologists’ Award to Novelist Crichton Is
Inappropriate”
29. ^ Global warming: a perspective from earth history www.geolsoc.org.uk
30. ^ IUGG Resolution 6
31. ^ [ http://www.iugs.org/PDF/05_climatechange.pdf IUGS pdf
Climate Change p.6]
32. ^ [ http://www.iugs.org/PDF/05_climatechange.pdf IUGS pdf
Climate Change p.9]
33. ^ Position Statement of the Division of Atmospheric and Climate
Sciences of the European Geosciences Union on Climate Change.
34. ^ CFES ‘’Global Climate Change’’
35. ^ Global Climate Change Position Statement
36. ^ Human Impacts on Climate
37. ^ Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate
change, American Astronomical Society, 2004
38. ^ Statement supporting AGU statement on human-induced climate
change, American Institute of Physics, 2003
39. ^ [1], American Physical Society, 2007
40. ^ "Statement on Global Climate Change". American Chemical
Society (2007). Retrieved on 2008-01-09.
41. ^ Policy Statement, Climate Change and Energy February 2007
42. ^ Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere www.climatescience.gov
43. ^ [http://www.amstat.org/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=climatechange
American Statistical Association Statement on Climate Change
44. ^ Policy Statement on Climate Variability and Change by the
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
45. ^ Position Statement: Climate Change from http://dpa.aapg.org
46. ^ a b Julie Brigham-Grette et al. (September 2006). "Petroleum
Geologists‘ Award to Novelist Crichton Is Inappropriate". Eos 87 (36).
Retrieved on 2007-01-23. “The AAPG stands alone among scientific
societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming.”
47. ^ Volunteers: Good For AAPG Climate
48. ^ Understanding and Responding to Climate Change
49. ^ Joint Science Academies' Statement
50. ^ The Science of Climate Change
51. ^ Climate Change Research: Issues for the Atmospheric and
Related Sciences February 2003
52. ^ "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). Retrieved on
2008-03-29.
53. ^ Naomi Oreskes (December 3, 2004 (Erratum January 21, 2005)).
"Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change".
Science 306 (5702): 1686. doi:10.1126/science.1103618. (see also for
an exchange of letters to Science)
54. ^ survey of climate scientists 1996 - 2003
55. ^ The Perspectives of Climate Scientists on Global Climate
Change
56. ^ Leading scientific journals 'are censoring debate on global
warming', Matthews, Robert Telegraph, May 2005
57. ^ Climate of Hostility Surrounds Global Warming Debate
58. ^ "Useless on-line survey of climate scientists"
59. ^ DIALOG and DISCCRS News
60. ^ Climate scientists' views on climate change: a survey Hans von
Storch and Dennis Bray
61. ^ Citizens For a Sound Economy Foundation
62. ^ Satellite Temperature Data: How Accurate? Cooler Heads
Coalition October 1997
63. ^ Bray, Dennis; Hans von Storch (1999). "Climate Science: An
Empirical Example of Postnormal Science". Bulletin of the American
Meteorological Society. Retrieved on 2007-09-04.
64. ^ T. R. Stewart, J. L. Mumpower, P. Reagan-Cirincione,
"Scientists' Agreement and Disagreement about Global Climate Change:
Evidence from Surveys", 15.
65. ^ R. Nixon, "Limbaughesque Science", citing a press release by
Gallup in the San Francisco Chronicle, 9/27/92.
66. ^ Steve Rendall, "The Hypocrisy of George Will", FAIR report,
citing the San Francisco Chronicle, 9/27/92.
67. ^ J.L. Best et al. Eco-Sanity, p. 55

External links

* US EPA climate change and global warming website
* Sherwood Rowland (Nobel Laureate for work on ozone depletion)
gives his opinion on climate change 2006 Freeview video provided by
the Vega Science Trust.
* Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions,
National Academy of Sciences

[show]
v • d • e
Global warming and climate change
[show]

Temperatures
Instrumental record · Satellite record · Past 1,000 years · Since 1880
· Geologic record
[show]

Causes
Anthropogenic

Aviation · Carbon dioxide · Climate sensitivity · Global dimming ·
Global warming potential · Greenhouse effect · Greenhouse gases ·
Keeling Curve · Land use and forestry · Urban heat island
Natural

Albedo · Bond events · Cloud forcing · Glaciation · Global cooling ·
Ocean variability (AMO · ENSO · IOD · PDO) · Orbital variations ·
Orbital forcing · Radiative forcing · Solar variation · Volcanism
Opinion and
controversy

Scientific opinion · Scientists opposing the mainstream assessment ·
Climate change denial
[show]

Models and politics
Models

Global climate model
Politics

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC / FCCC)
· Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
[show]

Potential effects and issues
General

Climate change and agriculture · Drought · Economics of global warming
· Glacier retreat · Mass extinction · Ozone depletion · Ocean
acidification · Sea level rise · Season creep · Shutdown of
thermohaline circulation
By country

Australia · India · United States
[show]

Mitigation
Kyoto Protocol

Clean Development Mechanism · Joint Implementation · Bali roadmap
Governmental

European Climate Change Programme · United Kingdom Climate Change
Programme · Oil phase-out in Sweden
Schemes

Emissions trading · Personal carbon trading · Carbon tax · Carbon
offset · Carbon credit · Carbon dioxide sink (Carbon sequestration) ·
Cap and Share
Energy conservation

Efficient energy use · Renewable energy · Renewable energy
commercialization · Renewable energy development · Soft energy path
Other

G8 Climate Change Roundtable · Individual and political action on
climate change
[show]

Proposed adaptations
Strategies

Damming glacial lakes · Drought tolerance · Irrigation investment ·
Rainwater storage · Sustainable development · Weather control
Programmes

Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change · Land Allocation Decision Support
System
Category:Global warming · Category:Climate change · Glossary of
climate change
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change"
Categories: Climate change assessment and attribution | Global warming
Hidden category: Semi-protected
Views

* Article
* Discussion
* View source
* History

Personal tools

* Log in / create account

Navigation

* Main page
* Contents
* Featured content
* Current events
* Random article

Search

Interaction

* About Wikipedia
* Community portal
* Recent changes
* Contact Wikipedia
* Donate to Wikipedia
* Help

Toolbox

* What links here
* Related changes
* Upload file
* Special pages
* Printable version
* Permanent link
* Cite this page

Languages

* Polski

Powered by MediaWiki
Wikimedia Foundation

* This page was last modified on 19 July 2008, at 09:34.
* All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free
Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.)
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit
charity.
.