Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature

Permanent Link:: http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI15042689/00001

Material Information

Title:: Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
Series Title:: Environmental Research Letters
Creator:: John Cook
Dana Nuccitelli
Sarah A. Green
Mark Richardson
Barbel Winkler
Rob Painting
Robert Wray
Peter Jacobs
Andrew Skuce
Affiliation:: University of Queensland -- Global Change Institute
Skeptical Science
Michigan Technological University -- Department of Chemistry
Department of Meteorology
Skeptical Science
Skeptical Science
Memorial University -- Department of Geography
George Mason University -- Department of Environmental Science and Policy
Salt Spring Consulting Ltd
Publisher:: Institute of Physics
Publication Date:: 2013
Language:: English

Subjects / Keywords:: climate change
global warming
unknownIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
climatic mitigation

Abstract:: We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors’ self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

Source Institution:: Florida International University
Rights Management:: Please contact the owning institution for licensing and permissions. It is the user's responsibility to ensure use does not violate any third party rights.