Proposed Public Statement by
Ethical Climate Scientists
NOTE: This is my proposal for a public statement by climate scientists who are committed to the field's ethical principles. It announces a professional split with their mainstream colleagues, who continue to disseminate deadly climate falsehoods.
Citizens of Earth:
The undersigned are climate scientists who are determined to serve society by upholding the field's ethical principles and thus telling the scientific truth about the climate crisis. We are appalled that mainstream climate science consistently violates these principles by falsifying both the crisis and its solutions. With this statement we therefore dissociate ourselves professionally from our mainstream colleagues.
Our primary reason for taking this divisive step is the extreme weather of 2021. These events have convinced us that, unless our discipline is fundamentally transformed to guide rational human action, the crisis will rapidly escalate and a horrific future will unfold. Based on these events, we now understand that:
- At 1.2°C the global temperature anomaly is already intolerable, at 1.5°C it will be catastrophic, and at 2°C or higher it will threaten human extinction.
- The Earth's average surface temperature must therefore be rapidly decreased by about 1°C. In other words, global cooling must now be aggressively pursued.
To our dismay, the mainstream's response to the weather events has been to rigidly maintain its ecocidal stance: aim for net-zero emissions and thus allow global warming to continue. The mainstream also disseminates the defeatist falsehood that the best humankind can do is limit how disastrous climate conditions will become. Human agency to improve these conditions is thereby irrationally dismissed.
As noted above, our primary motivations are the ethical principles that have been adopted by our field's professional associations. For example, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) states in its Scientific Integrity and Professional Ethics booklet that the AGU promotes science for the benefit of humankind and a sustainable future. The document stipulates that, "Members have an ethical obligation to responsibly, accurately, and clearly inform the public about natural resources, hazards, and other geoscience phenomena of importance to the well-being of Earth and society." The mainstream egregiously violates this obligation and is therefore guilty of scientific misconduct.
These are our proposed measures for rapid global cooling:
- Aggressive reduction of GHG releases to minimize further environmental damage. These reductions will entail sharply increased GHG efficiencies, including the widespread implementation of carbon capture and storage (CCS).
- Prudent control of fossil-fuel emissions. These emissions contain aerosols, which have a desirable cooling effect. Reducing emissions and thus aerosols would benefit human health, but could dangerously increase global warming.
- Immediate implementation of a rational set of SRM measures. Strong consideration should be given to land- and space-based mirrors, marine-cloud brightening, polar ice brightening, and stratospheric aerosol injection.
The main practical implications of this professional split are as follows. First, we will identify ourselves as practitioners of "ethical climate science" rather than climate science generically. Second, we will vigorously oppose the mainstream's falsehoods and promote the above survival measures. This implies our strong opposition to the IPCC, which has long represented the mainstream's views. Third, we will urge professional bodies such as the AGU to sanction the mainstream for its scientific misconduct. Fourth, we will attempt to persuade media outlets, educational institutions, and other sources of public information to tell the scientific truth about the crisis and humankind's rational response.
We urge our colleagues to reject the unethical, unscientific, and unprofessional assertions of mainstream climate science by joining our breakaway group.