Cliamte change caused by humans only

Checked on December 16, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.

Executive summary

Scientific agencies and peer-reviewed reports say human activities — chiefly burning fossil fuels — are the primary cause of the recent rise in global temperatures and many related impacts (NOAA: “unequivocally caused,” [1]; NASA: “human activity is the principal cause,” [10]3). Independent analyses and seasonal attribution studies find human-caused greenhouse-gas emissions made extreme heat, warm oceans and many floods and storms more likely and more intense in 2024–25 (Climate Central, Copernicus, Lancet, [6]; [4]; [3]; [10]2).

1. Scientific consensus: human activities drive modern warming

Decades of observational data and synthesis reports conclude that the recent global warming trend is caused overwhelmingly by human emissions of greenhouse gases, especially CO2 from burning coal, oil and gas; NOAA cites the IPCC finding that “Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming” and notes surface temperature is about 1.1°C above 1850–1900 for 2011–2020 [1]. Major scientific institutions — NASA, Copernicus and others — repeat that human activity is the principal driver [2] [3].

2. Attribution studies link emissions to specific extremes

Rapid attribution work and seasonal analyses show that many 2024–25 extreme events were made more likely or stronger by human-caused warming: Climate Central reports carbon pollution influenced temperatures “in nearly all regions” in winter 2024–25 and quantified increased odds for city-level heat exposure [4] [5]. Climate Central also estimated ocean warmth tied to Hurricane Melissa increased its wind speed and damage potential [6]. Copernicus documents record global temperatures and sea-surface warmth tied to human-caused change [3].

3. Health, ecosystems and sea level: reports link harm to emissions

Multiple reviews and commission reports portray direct harm from human-driven climate change. The Lancet Countdown says climate change is “driven by human-caused greenhouse gas emissions” and is already costing lives and harming health with mean annual temperatures exceeding 1.5°C in 2024 [7]. The 2025 state-of-the-climate review outlines accelerating impacts and calls human-driven alterations “here now” [8]. A Nature study and other research cited in overviews attribute rapid sea-level rise and land subsidence largely to human activity in some regions [9].

4. Official messaging versus scientific findings: the EPA controversy

News outlets report that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency revised or removed explicit statements on its public website linking recent climate change to human activity; The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN document deletions or edits that downplay the human causes on specific pages [10] [11] [12]. Those reporting outlets say other EPA pages still mention human links, creating an inconsistent public presentation [12].

5. Where sources disagree or omit: limits of the provided material

Available sources consistently affirm human causation for modern warming, yet they also document an administrative decision at the EPA to change website language, which raises questions about policy motives [10] [12] [11]. The provided reporting does not include direct statements from EPA leadership explaining the edits or any internal scientific reassessments by the agency negating human causation; those explanations are not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting).

6. What this means for public policy and legal authority

Scientific findings underpin regulatory authority to control greenhouse gases; reporting notes the EPA edit comes alongside policy moves to ease fossil-fuel development and a reported effort to remove a finding that climate change threatens human health, which would affect legal authority to regulate CO2 (The New York Times, p1_s1). That is an explicit linkage in the reporting between changes in public-facing science language and potential shifts in regulation [10].

7. Bottom line and competing perspectives

The scientific literature and major climate agencies state human activity is the principal cause of contemporary global warming [1] [2]. Independent attribution analyses attribute recent extremes and record warmth to human-driven emissions [6] [4] [3]. Reporting documents a contrasting administrative action that downplays explicit references to human causation on some EPA web pages [10] [12] [11]. Readers should treat official website wording changes as policy choices, not scientific rebuttals, and weigh peer-reviewed and agency syntheses as the primary evidence base [1] [2] [7].

Limitations: this analysis uses only the supplied sources and cannot report on EPA internal deliberations or statements beyond what those stories cite; those internal explanations are not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting).

Want to dive deeper?
What is the scientific consensus on human responsibility for climate change as of 2025?
How much of recent global warming is attributed to human activities versus natural variability?
Which human activities contribute most to greenhouse gas emissions and how have they changed recently?
What evidence (observational and modeling) links emissions from fossil fuels to observed climate impacts?
What are the main uncertainties scientists still debate about human versus natural causes of climate change?