Contrarian Climate Scientists

I thought it would be helpful to maintain a complete list of contrarian scientists on AGW. The purpose of this is not to be a kind of hit piece on contrarian climate scientists. To the extent that these scientists actually do research and publish these results in reputable, on-topic scientific journals, I have no beef with them. However, this list has not aged well. Seven years ago, Roy Spencer lamented that the average age of contrarians with credentials in climate science was between 65 and 70 and there are no new contrarian "researchers coming up through the ranks." This means that the average age of contrarian climate scientists has increased to 72 to 77 now. Lists promoted by other contrarians often include scientists that are now dead or retired. I thought it would be useful to maintain an accurate list to document what is so painfully obvious even to Roy Spencer: contrarian positions among credentialed climate scientists are experiencing a death by attrition.

To make the list of "active" scientists you need to meet the following criteria. You need to:

  1. be a credentialed climate scientist with a PhD in a relevant scientific field, and 
  2. have published at least one paper in a reputable, peer-reviewed and on-topic scientific journal in the last 5 years with original research that challenges some aspect AGW. 

To make the "inactive" list I drop the requirement for a published paper in the last 5 years. I'm not including people on my lists that are:

  1. deceased (Michaels, etc)
  2. social media influencers (Martz, Biggers, Stossel, etc)
  3. shills and grifters (Lueken, Plimer, Wrightstone, Shewchuk, Heller, etc)
  4. non-scientists (Pielke Jr, Lomborg, Shellenberger, etc)
  5. Engineers (Soon, etc), or scientists who are non-experts in climate science but have decided to be use their retirement years for political activism (Happer, Clauser, Koonin, etc).
Feel free to comment with people that fit the criteria for active or inactive contrarian climate scientists, and I'll edit this page to make it more complete.

Active Credentialed Climate Scientists

Living scientists with a PhD in a climate-related field that have published research in a reputable journal in the last 5 years. Hyperlinks with their names link to posts I've written having to do with either their work or work they have supported.

1. John Christy
Atmospheric sciences, University of Illinois. Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. Christy is retired as of July 2026, so I will be moving him to the inactive list.

2. David Legates
Climatology. Former professor of geography at the University of Delaware. Former Director of the Center for Climatic Research, and former Delaware state climatologist. Currently he's a "research fellow" at the Independent Institute.

3. Nicola Scafetta
Physics, University of North Texas. Research scientist at the University of Napoli Federico II. Formerly at the ACRIM lab group and assistant professor of physics at Duke University.

4. Nir Shaviv
Solar science, Israel Institute of Technology. Professor at the Racah Institute of Physics of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

5. Roy Spencer
Meteorology, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Currently he is at the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. Spencer has announced that he's planning to retire with John Christy, but he has not indicated that this is official yet, to my knowledge.

6. Henrik Svensmark
Physics, Technical University of Denmark. Svensmark was recently laid off from the Technical University of Denmark, which may be (according to him) a "death blow" to his research. I will wait before moving him to the "inactive" list to see where he lands.

7. Anthony Lupo
PhD Atmospheric Science, Professor of Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri


Inactive Credentialed Climate Scientists

Scientists with a PhD in a climate-related field that are still alive but have not published contrarian research in a reputable journal in the last 5 years.

1. Judith Curry
Geophysical sciences, University of Chicago. Curry retired from academia in 2017.

2. Richard Lindzen
Applied mathematics, MIT; professor of atmospheric sciences emeritus at MIT. Lindzen retired from MIT in 2013.

3. Lennaert Bengtsson Meteorology, Stockholm University, former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg. Bengtsson retired in 2000.

4. Ferenc Miskolczi
Atmospheric physics. Retired NASA/AS&M Senior Scientist, Foreign Associate Member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Miskolczi retired from NASA in 2006.


Comments

  1. FizzyAugust 3, 2026 at 11:00 PM

    You could add Anthony Lupo to your credentialed contrarions - an interesting case. Also PLEASE: Ferenc Miskolczi was associated with NASA Langley, not NASA Ames (where I worked!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scott SimmonsAugust 4, 2026 at 1:19 AM

      Thanks for the add and correction. The most recent paper I can find from Lupo is 2020, so I put him in the inactive category. I also grabbed both his and Miskolczi's bio line from the Clintel document they both signed.

      Delete
    2. FizzyAugust 4, 2026 at 4:04 PM

      Lupo is quite active with many co-authorships in recent years. Interestingly, some of them address trends related to global warming (e.g. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2024.101954). Nevertheless, he embraces familiar contrarian arguments. See for instance https://www.independent.org/article/2022/04/15/we-can-adapt-to-climate-change-without-destroying-our-way-of-life/

      Delete
    3. Scott SimmonsAugust 4, 2026 at 5:12 PM

      Thanks! Weird that I missed that study. I moved him up into the active category.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Does NOAA have "Ghost Stations" for US Temperatures?

Image
The Epoch Times (ET) is a newspaper operated by the Falun Gong cult, formed in 1992. The cult has opposed the Chinese Communist Party, but recently it has made some inroads into the US politics, where it supports far-right political agendas; its ET newspaper has promoted a number of conspiracy theories involving QAnon, anti-vaccine propaganda, and climate science denial. In a recent " premium report ," the Epoch Times claims that the U.S. Temperature dataset operated by NOAA contains data from "non existent temperature stations" and asserts that there are "hundreds of ‘ghost’ climate stations" that are no longer operational, and data is just filled in from surrounding stations, with the implication that this is done to support Biden's climate policies. The tl;dr point here is that what the article calls "ghost stations" are actually just interpolated values used to calculate area-weighted means in an old dataset that NOAA no longer uses. The...
Read more

Was There a "Mike's Nature Trick" to "Hide the Decline?" Part 1 - Misreading CRU Emails

Image
In November 2009, someone likely stole[1] and publicly released over 1,000 emails from Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. Following this, people combed through all these emails  looking for evidence of frauds and coverups on the part of climate scientists. They found very little damaging information, but not everything they found was was good. There were, as best I can tell, four categories of content that were discovered: The normal kinds of communication you'd expect to find in correspondence between scientists Words and phrases that were twisted out of context and redefined to support an imagined conspiracy that had been imposed on the emails. Evidence of mean-spirited attacks on contrarian scientists and heavy-handed tactics intended to punish journals that published contrarian studies.  A single email describing the process of creating a graph for a WMO statement that used the phrase "hide the decline."  Here I plan to tackle the "hid...
Read more

What about Those 50 Failed Climate Predictions?

Image
Did you know that there have been 50 failed doomsday predictions since the 1960s? Yea, neither did I, but that's what an opinion piece at AEI from 2019 claims. The article compiles its list from several sources, including 27 from Tony Heller. A Breitbart article upped that to 41. Then Perry added 9 more from Heller to get it up to 50. When his list had 41 predictions, Perry wrote, "For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong. In other words, on at least 41 occasions, these so-called experts have predicted some terrible environmental catastrophe was imminent... and it never happened. And not once — not even once!" The logic of this is bafflingly stupid, even if we accept his opinions on these predictions at face value. If there are 41 (updated to 50) failed predictions on this list, that doesn't indicate a ...
Read more