Advertisement

The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We’re Not Wrong?

  • Naomi Oreskes

Abstract

In 1995, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change announced that anthropogenic climate change had become discernible. Since then, numerous independent studies have affirmed that anthropogenic climate change is underway, and the meta-conclusion that there is a broad expert consensus on this point. It has also been demonstrated that most of the challenges to this claim come from interested parties outside the scientific community. But even if we allow that the challenges to climate science are politically or economically motivated, it does not prove that the scientific consensus is correct. In other words, even if we accept the fact of scientific consensus, how do we know that this consensus is not wrong? This chapter addresses this question by examining a set of criteria that philosophers have traditionally or recently identified as possible bases for trust in scientific conclusions, and shows that climate science meets all of these criteria. Thus, while there is no way to know for sure that scientists are correct in their conclusions, the various means we have to test and evaluate scientific claims lead to the conclusion that, so far as we are able to tell, it is most likely that scientists are not wrong about the reality of anthropogenic climate change.

References

  1. Alley, Richard, Terje Bernsten, Nathaniel Bindoff, Zhenlin Chen, Amnat Chidthaisong, Pierre Fredlingstein, Johnathan Gregory, et al. 2007. AR4 Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policy Makers. Geneva: IPPC Secretariat: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Accessed 31 Mar 2007.Google Scholar
  2. American Geophysical Union Council. 2003. Human Impacts of Climate. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.Google Scholar
  3. American Meteorological Society. 2003. Climate Change Research: Issues for the Atmospheric and Related Sciences. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 84: 508–515. https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/about-ams/ams-statements/archive-statements-of-the-ams/climatechange-research-issues-for-the-atmospheric-and-related-sciences/.
  4. Americans See a Climate Problem. 2006. Time.com, March 26.
  5. Anderegg, William R.L., James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, and Stephen H. Schneider. 2010. Expert Credibility in Climate Change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107 (27): 12107–12109. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1003187107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arctic Council. 2004. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. Oslo: Arctic Council. Accessed 14 Mar 2005.Google Scholar
  7. Bero, Lisa. 2003. Implications of the Tobacco Industry Documents for Public Health and Policy. Annual Review of Public Health 24: 267–288. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.24.100901.140813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borick, Christopher, Erick Iachapelle, and Barry Rabe. 2010. Climate Compared: Public Opinion on Climate Change in the United States and Canada. People.Google Scholar
  9. Boykoff, M.T. 2011. Who Speaks for the Climate?: Making Sense of Media Reporting on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boykoff, Maxwell T., and Jules M. Boykoff. 2004. Balance as Bias: Global Warming and the US Prestige Press. Global Environmental Change 2 (14): 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Briffa, Keith R., and Timothy J. Osborn. 2002. Blowing Hot and Cold. (Perspectives: Paleoclimate). Science 295 (5563): 2227–2229. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1069486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Browne, John. 1997. Climate Change: The New Agenda. Stanford University, May 19.Google Scholar
  13. Bruce, James P., Hoesung Lee, and Erik F. Haites. 1996. Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Cook, John, D. Nuccitelli, S.A. Green, M. Richardson, B. Winkler, R. Painting, R. Way, P. Jacobs, and A. Skuce. 2013. Quantifying the Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming in the Scientific Literature. Environmental Research Letters 8 (2). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024.
  15. Cook, J., N. Oreskes, P.T. Doran, W.R. Anderegg, B. Verheggen, E.W. Maibach, J.S. Carlton, S. Lewandowsky, A.G. Skuce, S.A. Green, and D. Nuccitelli. 2016. Consensus on Consensus: A Synthesis of Consensus Estimates on Human-Caused Global Warming. Environmental Research Letters 11 (4): 048002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Deming, David. 2005. How ‘Consensus’ on Global Warming Is Used to Justify Draconian Reform. Investor’s Business Daily, March 18, A16.Google Scholar
  17. Doran, Peter T., and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman. 2009. Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change. EOS Transactions 90: 22–23. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009EO030002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Edwards, Paul N. 2010. A Vast Machine: Computer Models, Climate Data, and the Politics of Global Warming. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Environmental Defense. 2005. Too Slick: Stop ExxonMobil’s Global Warming Misinformation Campaignhttps://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/3820_Solutions_07_04.pdf.
  20. Esper, Jan, Edward R. Cook, and Fritz H. Schweingruber. 2002. Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability. Science (New York, N.Y.) 295 (5563): 2250–2253. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1066208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flannery, Tim Fridtjof. 2006. The Weather Makers: How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth. New York: Grove Press.Google Scholar
  22. Fleming, K., P. Johnston, D. Zwartz, Y. Yokoyama, K. Lambeck, and J. Chappell. 1998. Refining the Eustatic Sea-Level Curve Since the Last Glacial Maximum Using Far-and Intermediate-Field Sites. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 163 (1): 327–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Freudenburg, William R., and Violetta Muselli. 2010. Global Warming Estimates, Media Expectations, and the Asymmetry of Scientific Challenge. Global Environmental Change, Governance, Complexity and Resilience 20 (3): 483–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.04.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gelbspan, R. 1997. The Heat Is On: The High Stakes Battle Over Earth’s Threatened Climate. Reading: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  25. Gelbspan, Ross. 2005. Boiling Point: How Politicians, Big Oil and Coal, Journalists, and Activists Are Fueling the Climate Crisis-and What We Can Do to Avert Disaster. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Gillispie, Charles. 1975. Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Vol._12: Ibn Rushd—Jean-Servais Stas. Vol. 12. New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
  27. Gillispie, Charles Coulston. 1981. Dictionary of Scientific Biography. New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
  28. Hansen, James, Andrew Lacis, Reto Ruedy, and Makiko Sato. 1992. Potential Climate Impact of Mount Pinatubo Eruption. Geophysical Research Letters 19: 215–218. https://doi.org/10.1029/91GL02788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harrison, Paul, and Fred Pearce. 2000. AAAS Atlas of Population and Environment. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hassol, Susan Joy. 2008. Improving How Scientists Communicate About Climate Change. EOS Transactions 89: 106–107. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008EO110002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hempel, Carl G. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation, and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  32. Holland, M.M., and C.M. Bitz. 2003. Polar Amplification of Climate Change in Coupled Models. Climate Dynamics 21 (3/4): 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-003-0332-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Houghton, John, G.J. Jenkins, and J.J. Ephraums, eds. 1990. Scientific Assessment of Climate Change: Report of Working Group 1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Houghton, John, Meria Filho, B.A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Katteberg, and K. Maskell, eds. 1995. Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change: Report of Working Group 1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Houghton, John, Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Nouger, P.J. van der Linden, X. Dai, K. Maskell, and C.A. Johnson. 2001. Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2005. About IPCC, February 7.Google Scholar
  37. Kerr, Richard A. 1993. Pinatubo Global Cooling on Target. Science 259: 594. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.259.5095.594.Google Scholar
  38. Kolbert, Elizabeth. 2006. Field Notes from a Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate Change. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  39. Krosnick, J.A., A.L. Holbrook, L. Lowe, and P.S. Visser. 2006. The Origins and Consequences of Democratic Citizens’ Policy Agendas: A Study of Popular Concern About Global Warming. Climatic Change 77 (1): 7–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Leiserowitz, Anthony, Edward Maibach, and Connie Roser-Renouf. 2011. Global Warming’s Six Americas in March 2012 and November 2011. Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. Accessed 7 June 2017.Google Scholar
  41. Lipton, Peter. 1991. Inference to the Best Explanation. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. ———. 2004. Inference to the Best Explanation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Lorenzoni, Irene, and Nick F. Pidgeon. 2006. Public Views on Climate Change: European and USA Perspectives. Climatic Change 77 (1–2): 73–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9072-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Manabe, Syukuro, and R.J. Stouffer. 1980. Sensitivity of a Global Climate Model to an Increase of CO2 Concentration in the Atmosphere. Journal of Geophysical Research 85 (C10): 5529–5554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. ———. 1994. Multiple-Century Response of a Coupled Ocean-Atmosphere Model to an Increase of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Journal of Climate; (United States) 7: 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McCarthy, James J., Osvaldo F. Canziani, Neil A. Leary, David Dokken, and Kasey S. White. 2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Metz, Bert, Ogunlade Davidson, Rob Swart, and Jiahua Pan. 2001. Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Mooney, Chris, and Basic Books. 2006. The Republican War on Science. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  49. Moser, Susanne C., and Lisa Dilling. 2004. Making Climate Hot: Communicating the Urgency and Challenge of Global Climate Change. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 46 (10): 32–46.Google Scholar
  50. Muller, Richard A., Robert Rohde, Robert Jacobsen, Elizabeth Muller, Saul Perlmutter, Arthur Rosenfeld, Jonathan Wurtele, Donald Groom, and Charlotte Wickham. 2013. A New Estimate of the Average Earth Surface Land Temperature Spanning 1753 to 2011. Geoinformatics & Geostatistics: An Overview (January 2, 2014). https://doi.org/10.4172/2327-4581.1000101.
  51. National Academy of Sciences, Committee on the Science of Climate Change. 2001. Climate Change Science; An Analysis of Some Key Questions. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  52. Oreskes, Naomi. 2004. Beyond the Ivory Tower. The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change. Science (New York, N.Y.) 306 (5702).Google Scholar
  53. Oreskes, Naomi, and Erik M. Conway. 2012. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  54. Oreskes, Naomi, David A. Stainforth, and Leonard A. Smith. 2010. Adaptation to Global Warming: Do Climate Models Tell Us What We Need to Know? Philosophy of Science 77 (5): 1012–1028. https://doi.org/10.1086/657428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Popper, Karl Raimund. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  56. Price, Derek J. De Solla. 1986. Little Science, Big Science ... and Beyond. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Revelle, Roger. 1965. Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. In Restoring the Quality of Our Environment: A Report of the Environmental Pollution Panel, 111–133. Washington, DC: President’s Science Advisory Committee.Google Scholar
  58. Roach, John. 2004. The Year Global Warming Got Respect. National Geographic.Google Scholar
  59. Smith, Leonard A. 2002. What Might We Learn from Climate Forecasts? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99 (Suppl. 1): 2487–2492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Somerville, Richard C.J., and Susan Joy Hassol. 2011. Communicating the Science of Climate Change. Physics Today 64 (10): 48–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Soon, Willie, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood Idso, Kirill Kondratyev, and Eric Posmentier. 2001. Modeling Climatic Effects of Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Unknowns and Uncertainties. Climate Research 18 (3): 259. https://doi.org/10.3354/cr018259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Soon, Willie, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood B. Idso, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, and Eric S. Posmentier. 2002. Modeling Climatic Effects of Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Unknowns and Uncertainties. Reply to Risbey (2002). Climate Research 22 (2): 187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stainforth, David, Tolu Aina, C. Christensen, M. Collins, N. Faull, D.J. Frame, J.A. Kettleborough, et al. 2005. Uncertainty in Predictions of the Climate Response to Rising Levels of Greenhouse Gases. Nature 433 (7024): 403–406. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Supran, G., and N. Oreskes. 2017. Assessing ExxonMobil’s Climate Change Communications (1977–2014). Environmental Research Letters 12 (8): 084019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. van den Hove, Sybille, Marc Le Menestrel, and Henri-Claude de Bettignies. 2002. The Oil Industry and Climate Change: Strategies and Ethical Dilemmas. Climate Policy 1: 3. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2002.0202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Watkin, Daniel. 2004. Roman Catholic Priests’ Group Calls for Allowing Married Clergy Members. New York Times, April 28.Google Scholar
  67. Watson, Robert T. 1996. Groupe d’experts intergouvernamental sur l’évolution du clima. In Climate Change 1995: Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses, ed. Organisation météorologique mondiale and Programme des Nations Unies pour l’environnement. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Watson, R.T., M.C. Zinyowera, and R.H. Moss. 1996. Climate Change 1995. Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Watson, R.T., and D.L. Albritton, eds. 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report: Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Weart, Spencer R. 2008. The Discovery of Global Warming. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wickham, Charlotte, Robert Rohde, Richard A. Muller, Jonathan Wurtele, Judith A. Curry, Donald Groom, Robert Jacobsen, S. Perimutter, Arthur Rosenfeld, and S. Mosher. 2013. Influence of Urban Heating on the Global Temperature Land Average Using Rural Sites Identified from MODIS Classifications. Geoinformatics & Geostatistics: An Overview 1 (2). https://doi.org/10.4172/2327-4581.1000104.
  72. Wilson, Edward O. 2000. Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Naomi Oreskes
    • 1
  1. 1.Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations