Free Peer Reviewed Articles on Climate Change Not Happening
Our squad of citizen science volunteers at Skeptical Science has published a new survey in the journal Environmental Research Letters of over 12,000 peer-reviewed climate science papers, as the Guardian reports today. This is the nearly comprehensive survey of its kind, and the inspiration of this weblog's name: Climate Consensus – the 97%.
The survey
In 2004, Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of 928 peer-reviewed climate papers published betwixt 1993 and 2003, finding none that rejected the man cause of global warming. We decided that information technology was fourth dimension to expand upon Oreskes' work by performing a keyword search of peer-reviewed scientific journal publications for the terms 'global warming' and 'global climate change' between the years 1991 and 2011.
Our team agreed upon definitions of categories to put the papers in: explicit or implicit endorsement of human-caused global warming, no stance, and implicit or explicit rejection or minimization of the human being influence, and began the long process of rating over 12,000 abstracts.
Nosotros decided from the commencement to take a conservative approach in our ratings. For example, a written report which takes it for granted that global warming volition continue for the foreseeable future could easily be put into the implicit endorsement category; in that location is no reason to expect global warming to continue indefinitely unless humans are causing it. Nevertheless, unless an abstract included language about the cause of the warming, we categorized information technology as 'no stance'.
Each paper was rated by at least ii people, and a dozen volunteers completed most of the 24,000 ratings. The volunteers were a very internationally diverse grouping. Team members' home countries included Australia, U.s., Canada, United kingdom, New Zealand, Germany, Finland, and Italia.
Nosotros also decided that request the scientists to rate their own papers would be the platonic mode to check our results. Who knows what the papers say better than the authors who wrote them? We received responses from 1,200 scientists who rated a total of over 2,100 papers. Different our team's ratings that but considered the summary of each newspaper presented in the abstract, the scientists considered the entire paper in the self-ratings.
The results
Based on our abstract ratings, we establish that just over four,000 papers took a position on the cause of global warming, 97.1% of which endorsed human-acquired global warming. In the scientist self-ratings, nigh 1,400 papers were rated equally taking a position, 97.2% of which endorsed human-caused global warming. Many papers captured in our literature search merely investigated an effect related to climate change without taking a position on its crusade.
Our survey found that the consensus has grown slowly over time, and reached nigh 98% as of 2011. Our results are besides consistent with several previous surveys finding a 97% consensus amongst climate experts on the human being cause of global warming.
Why is this important?
Several studies accept shown that people who are enlightened of scientific consensus on human-caused global warming are more likely to support government action to curb greenhouse gas emissions. This was near recently shown by a paper just published in the journal Climate change. People will generally defer to the judgment of experts, and they trust climate scientists on the discipline of global warming.
Even so, vested interests take long realized this and engaged in a campaign to misinform the public most the scientific consensus. For example, a memo from communications strategist Frank Luntz leaked in 2002 brash Republicans,
"Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views well-nigh global warming will change appropriately. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary event in the argue "
This campaign has been successful. A 2012 poll from US Pew Research Center found less than half of Americans idea scientists agreed humans were causing global warming. The media has assisted in this public misconception, with most climate stories "balanced" with a "skeptic" perspective. However, this results in making the two–3% seem like l%. In trying to reach "balance", the media has actually created a very unbalanced perception of reality. As a result, people believe scientists are yet separate about what'southward causing global warming, and therefore there is not nearly plenty public back up or motivation to solve the problem.
Check our results for yourself
We chose to submit our paper to Environmental Research Letters because it is a well-respected, high-touch periodical, but also because it offers the pick of making a paper open up access, free for anyone to download.
Nosotros have too set up a public ratings system at Skeptical Science where anybody tin can duplicate our survey. Read and rate as many abstracts as you lot similar, and see what level of consensus you notice. You can compare your results to our abstract ratings, and to the author cocky-ratings.
Human-acquired global warming
We fully anticipate that climate contrarians will respond by saying "we don't dispute that humans cause some global warming." First, there are a lot of people who practise dispute that humans crusade whatever global warming. Our paper shows that their position is non supported in the scientific literature.
Almost papers don't quantify the human contribution to global warming, because it doesn't have tens of thousands of papers to establish that reality. Yet, as noted above, if a paper minimized the human contribution, nosotros classified that as a 'rejection'. For example, if a paper were to say "the lord's day caused almost of the global warming over the past century," that would exist included in the less than iii% of papers rejecting or minimizing human being-caused global warming.
Many studies just defer to the practiced summary of climate scientific discipline research put together past the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC), which says that most of the global warming since the mid-20th century has been caused by humans. And according to recent research, that statement is actually too conservative. Of the papers which specifically examine the contributors to global warming, they well-nigh all conclude that humans are the dominant crusade over the past 50 to 100 years.
Most studies but accept this fact and keep to examine the consequences of this human-caused global warming and associated climate change.
Another important point is that once you accept that humans are causing global warming, you must also have that global warming is still happening. We crusade global warming past increasing the greenhouse consequence, and our greenhouse gas emissions merely keep accelerating. This ties in to the fact that as recent research has showed, global warming is accelerating. If you accept that humans are causing global warming, as over 97% of peer-reviewed scientific papers do, then this conclusion should not be at all controversial. Global warming cannot have all of a sudden stopped.
Spread the discussion
Given the importance of the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming in peoples' decisions whether to support activity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the public lack of awareness of the consensus, we need to brand people aware of these results. To that end, design and advert house SJI Associates generously created a website pro-bono, centered around the results of our survey. The website can be viewed at TheConsensusProject.com, and it includes a page where consensus graphics tin can be shared via social media or email. Skeptical Science also has a new folio of consensus graphics.
Quite mayhap the nigh of import matter to communicate about climate change is that there is a 97% consensus amongst the scientific experts and scientific research that humans are causing global warming. Let's spread the give-and-take and close the consensus gap.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/may/16/climate-change-scienceofclimatechange
0 Response to "Free Peer Reviewed Articles on Climate Change Not Happening"
Post a Comment