logo

 

 

 

Email This PagePrint This Page

The debate is over about whether or not climate change is real. Irrefutable evidence from around the world - including extreme weather events, record temperatures, retreating glaciers, and rising sea levels - all point to the fact climate change is happening now and at rates much faster than previously thought.

The overwhelming majority of scientists that study climate change agree that human activity is responsible for changing the climate. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is one of the largest bodies of international scientists ever assembled to study a scientific issue, comprised of more than 2,000 scientists from 100 countries. The IPCC has concluded that most of the warming observed during the past 50 years is attributable to human activities. Its findings have been publicly endorsed by the national academies of science of all G-8 countries, as well as those of China, India and Brazil. The Royal Society of Canada – together with the national academies of fifteen other nations – also issued a joint statement on climate change that stated, in part: "The work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the consensus of the international scientific community on climate change science. We recognize IPCC as the world's most reliable source of information on climate change."

Who are the climate change skeptics?

Despite the international scientific community’s consensus on climate change, a very small band of critics continues to deny that climate change exists or that humans are causing it. Widely known as climate change “skeptics” or "deniers", these individuals are generally not climate scientists and do not debate the science with the climate scientists directly – for example, by publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals or participating in international conferences on climate science. Instead, they focus their attention on the media, the general public, and policy makers with the goal of delaying action on climate change.

Not surprisingly, the skeptics have received significant funding from coal and oil companies, including ExxonMobil. They also have well-documented connections with public relations firms that have set up industry-funded lobby groups to - in the words of one leaked memo - "reposition global warming as theory (not fact)."

Over the years, the skeptics have employed a wide range of arguments against taking action on climate change - some of which actually contradict each other. For example, they have claimed that:

  • Climate change is not occurring
  • The global climate is actually getting colder
  • The global climate is getting warmer, but not because of human activities
  • The global climate is getting warmer, in part because of human activities, but this will create greater benefits than costs
  • The global climate is getting warmer, in part because of human activities, but the impacts are not sufficient to require any policy response

After 15 years of increasingly definitive scientific studies attesting to the reality and significance of global climate change, there has been a noticeable shift in the skeptics' tactics. Many skeptics no longer deny that climate change is happening, but instead argue that the cost of taking action is too high - or even worse, that it is too late to take action. All of these arguments are false and are rejected by the scientific community at large.

To gain an understanding of the level of scientific consensus on climate change, a recent study examined every article on climate change published in peer-reviewed scientific journals over a 10-year period. Of the 928 articles on climate change the authors found, not one of them disagreed with the consensus position that climate change is happening or is human-induced.

These findings contrast dramatically with the popular media's reporting on climate change. One recent study analyzed coverage of climate change in four influential American newspapers (New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, and Wall Street Journal) over a 14-year period. It found that more than half of the articles discussing climate change gave equal weight to the scientifically discredited views of the skeptics. 

This discrepancy is largely due to the media’s drive for balance in reporting. Journalists are trained to identify one position on any issue, and then seek out a conflicting position, providing both sides with roughly equal attention. Unfortunately, the “balance” of the different views within the media does not always correspond with the actual prevalence of each view within society, and can result in unintended bias. This has been the case with reporting on climate change, and as a result, many people believe that climate change is still being debated by scientists when in fact it is not.

While some level of debate is of course useful when looking at major social problems, eventually society needs to move on and actually address the issue. To do nothing about the problem of climate change is akin to letting a fire burn down a building because the precise temperature of the flames is unknown, or to not address the problem of smoking because one or two doctors still claim that it does not cause lung cancer. As the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) acknowledges, a lack of full scientific certainty about some aspects of climate change is not a reason for delaying an immediate response that will, at a reasonable cost, prevent dangerous consequences in the climate system. 

Learn More:

Who are the skeptics

ExxonMobil uses Big Tobacco’s tactics to manufacture uncertainty on climate science

‘Some Like It Hot' - Mother Jones article on climate change skeptics

The Global Warming Denial Lobby

'Mr. Cool & friends' - Globe and Mail article on climate change skeptics

Responding to Global Warming Skeptics - Prominent Skeptics Organizations

'The Smoke Behind the Deniers' Fire' - by George Monbiot

'The Denial Machine' - CBC's the fifth estate program (downloadable video)


Who funds the skeptics

What Exxon doesn’t want you to know

ExxonSecrets: How ExxonMobil funds the climate change skeptics

‘Put a Tiger In Your Think Tank’ - Mother Jones article on ExxonMobil funding

'Clash of the Titans' - An excerpt from the book ‘Boiling Point’

Exxpose Exxon

'Coal-fired cooperative coughs up cash to climate crank'

Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial


Statements by scientists & scientific academies on climate change

Joint science academies’ statement: Global response to climate change

Joint science academies' statement: The Science Of Climate Change

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Canada on Climate Change Science

RealClimate: Real Science from Climate Scientists


The Science of Climate Change

The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change

Myths vs. facts on global warming

Fact vs. fiction on global warming

Frequently Asked Questions about Global Warming

The Science of Global Warming


More information

'How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic' - Responses to the most common skeptic arguments

DeSmogBlog.com - Excellent blog on the skeptics

Journalistic Balance as Global Warming Bias

'Snowed' - Mother Jones article about the media's reporting on climate change

‘The Fossil Fools’ by George Monbiot

'While Washington Slept' - Vanity Fair

A review of the distorted science in Michael Crichton's State of Fear

'Hostile Climate' - On Bjorn Lomborg and climate change

Recent news stories on skeptics

‘It Would Seem I Was Wrong About Big Business’ By George Monbiot



Your Email:
Nature Challenge
Science Matters
Marine Scene

Take Action
All about David Suzuki
Speaking schedule
Science Matters
Bio