Statements from the Australian Academy of Science to Fact Check Response 1 A scientist generally refers to any individual who has conducted peer reviewed research in a scientific discipline, has relevant tertiary qualifications and training, applies and understands the scientific process, participates in peer review, and has demonstrated expertise in their area of science. A scientific consensus is reached when the accumulated evidence converges towards certain strong conclusions in the minds of diverse scientists. Such a consensus represents agreement on which pieces of knowledge have endured sufficient testing to be considered reliable. The Commonwealth Academies of Science Consensus Statement on Climate Change, published last year, represents the consensus views of tens of thousands of scientists. It marks the first time Commonwealth nations have come together to urge their governments to take further action to achieve net zero greenhouse gases emissions during the second half of the 21st century. Response 2 A mining geologist with relevant tertiary qualifications and training is a scientist. They use the scientific process and they have relevant expertise. However, if their science is not open to the scrutiny of the scientific community at large, it must necessarily be treated with a certain level of scepticism. A scientist talking about unpublished data or proprietary results, in any setting, would be treated with caution. This recognises that the commercial drivers of the behaviour of corporations are different to what drives publication in an academic setting. It should be noted that there are avenues for industry scientists to publish results. Patenting an invention, for example, requires a complete disclosure of the technology. Industry researchers are not usually prevented from publishing in academic journals. Similar considerations apply to government scientists – an unpublished report to government must be treated with more caution than a public report, or peer reviewed scientific papers.