Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature

'Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature<nowiki/>' is the title of John Cook et al. (2013) which was a landmark climate research paper. The paper found that 97.1% of climate scientists supported the consensus position that human cause climate change. As of March 2021, the paper has received at least 1,270,076 downloads.
The editors of the journal Environmental Research Letters awarded the paper as Best article of 2013.
Background
Research conducted with similar aims to John Cook’s paper have found similar results.
Doran and Zimmerman (2011) found a 97% consensus among climatologists.
Anderegg et al. (2010) studied climate expert’s opinion’s and again found a 97% consensus.
Leiserowitz et al. (2020) found a discrepancy between the opinion of the average American and what scientists think about the threat of global warming. They cite a consensus among scientists exceeding 90%.
Methodology and findings
The study was "conceived as a citizen science project by volunteers contributing to the Skeptical Science website". 11,944 abstracts were acquired by searching the Web of Science database, with criteria such as "global warming" or "global climate change". Volunteers then assessed each abstract and assigned it a 'level of agreement' - under Cook et al.'s agreement criterion. The abstracts were randomly distributed to volunteers to rate, with only the abstract and title visible. Each abstract was assessed by at least two raters."
Writing for The Guardian, Dr Richard Tol stated; "Cook and co selected some 12,000 papers from the scientific literature to test whether these papers support the hypothesis that humans played a substantial role in the observed warming of the Earth. 12,000 is a strange number. The climate literature is much larger. The number of papers on the detection and attribution of climate change is much, much smaller".
Response to the criticism
In response to the critisism Cook et al in 2016 performed a follow up study, called Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming, which sums up the consensus studies of 6 different studies regarding the scientific consensus about human caused climate change.
Furthermore Sceptical Science dedicated a website to the criticism and its rebuttal.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu