Skip Navigation

Climate Change

Environment
May 26, 2017
Direct Action Better Response To Climate-Related Problems Than Carbon Restrictions
Climate Change Weekly #250
Environment
May 26, 2017
Renounce Climate Alarmism
Ask President Trump to renounce climate alarmism now!
Government Spending
May 24, 2017
PRESS RELEASE: Heartland Institute Experts React to President Trump’s Fiscal Year 2018 Budget
" The proposed budget in fact incorporates tax reform by sharply reducing tax rates, as well as repealing and replacing Obamacare, which would cut taxes by about $1 trillion over 10 years." - Peter Ferrara
More News
Environment
May 22, 2017
Claims of Climate-Caused Human Health Problems Questioned
"Junk science" is behind many of the claims linking current levels of air pollution and climate change to human health problems.
Environment
May 18, 2017
Kill the Paris Treaty and Rip out its Roots
The Clexit Coalition today called on President Trump to keep his election promise to withdraw from the Paris Climate Treaty and stop US payments to all UN global warming programs.
Climate Change
May 18, 2017
‘Declare Independence from Climate Hysteria,’ Physicist Says
Princeton University physicist William Happer told the closing luncheon keynote address at The Heartland Institute’s 12th International Conference on Climate Change, “It’s time to declare independence from climate hysteria.”
 

The Issue

The debate over global warming is the most consequential public policy debate taking place today in the United States and around the world. The stakes are enormous.

According to some scientists, stabilizing the climate would require reducing carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent or even more by the middle of the century. Rationing access to energy and forcing a transition to alternatives to fossil fuels would reduce the quality of life of billions of people around the world, squander one of America’s greatest comparative advantages among the world’s nations, and cause the premature death of millions of people.

Most scientists do not believe human greenhouse gas emissions are a proven threat to the environment or to human well-being, despite a barrage of propaganda insisting otherwise coming from the environmental movement and echoed by its sycophants in the mainstream media. Surveys and article-counting exercises alleged to show a “consensus” invariably ask the wrong questions (e.g., is climate change happening, rather than whether a human impact is likely to be dangerous) or are methodologically flawed. More reliable research shows the science community is deeply divided and unsure about the causes and consequences of climate change.

Our Stance

The Heartland Institute has participated in the global debate over climate policy since 1993, when it published an influential book titled Eco-Sanity: A Common-Sense Guide to Environmentalism. Our position has always been that if human emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases pose a threat to the natural world and human health, then actions to avoid the threat would be necessary. But if the best-available research shows there is little danger or that there is nothing we can do to prevent climate change, then we should oppose legislation adopted in the name of “stopping” global warming.

Featured Subtopics

Flourishing corn crop
The evidence is overwhelming that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have will continue to help plants thrive, leading to greater biodiversity, shrinking deserts, expanded habitat for wildlife, and more food for a growing human population.
Woman with questioning look
The claim of “scientific consensus” on the causes and consequences of climate change is without merit. There is no survey or study showing “consensus” on any of the most important scientific issues in the climate change debate.
Chart showing upward economic growth
Economics can show committed environmentalists how they can better achieve their goals by recognizing fundamental economic principles such as the need to make trade-offs, to measure costs and benefits, and to take into account such economic concepts as discount rates and marginal costs.
Kids studying science in a lab
Overwhelming scientific evidence suggests the greenhouse gas-induced global climate signal is so small as to be embedded within the background variability of the natural climate system and is not dangerous. At the same time, global temperature change is occurring, as it always naturally does.

Additional Subtopics

  • Adaptation
  • Alarmism
  • Carbon Sequestrian
  • Climate Change Regulation
  • Climate Models
  • Human Effects
  • IPCC
  • Media Bias
  • NIPCC
  • Private Initiatives
  • Realism
  • Temperatures

Videos

Title: Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming FAQ: Is the science in the book peer-reviewed?
Description: Surveys show a large percentage of teachers are skeptical that human activity is causing a climate crisis, but they have access to a one-sided alarmist view of the subject that dominates text books for public and private schools. The Heartland Institute sent copies of “Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming” to more than 300,000 K-12 and college-level teachers all across America to ensure they have a resource to teach the controversy about this subject, and have in hand some of the scientific arguments that counter climate alarmism. As Heartland’s Tim Benson explains in this video, the science in the book comes from the peer-reviewed scientific literature, and is but one chapter in a large, upcoming volume of peer-reviewed data and analysis in the Climate Change Reconsidered series from the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change. See a free PDF copy of the book at this link: https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/why-scientists-disagree-about-global-warming

Climate Change Experts Team

The Heartland Institute's experts on climate change/global warming re available for legislative testimony, speaking engagements, and media interviews.

Staff & Fellows Policy Experts