Konsens in der Wissenschaft über den menschgemachten Klimawandel

@article{cook_consensus_2016,
title = {Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming},
volume = {11},
issn = {1748-9326},
shorttitle = {Consensus on consensus},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002},
doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002},
abstract = {The consensus that humans are causing recent global warming is shared by 90\%–100\% of publishing climate scientists according to six independent studies by co-authors of this paper. Those results are consistent with the 97\% consensus reported by Cook et al (Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024) based on 11 944 abstracts of research papers, of which 4014 took a position on the cause of recent global warming. A survey of authors of those papers (N = 2412 papers) also supported a 97\% consensus. Tol (2016 Environ. Res. Lett. 11 048001) comes to a different conclusion using results from surveys of non-experts such as economic geologists and a self-selected group of those who reject the consensus. We demonstrate that this outcome is not unexpected because the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science. At one point, Tol also reduces the apparent consensus by assuming that abstracts that do not explicitly state the cause of global warming (‘no position’) represent non-endorsement, an approach that if applied elsewhere would reject consensus on well-established theories such as plate tectonics. We examine the available studies and conclude that the finding of 97\% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies.},
language = {en},
number = {4},
urldate = {2021-11-13},
journal = {Environmental Research Letters},
author = {Cook, John and Oreskes, Naomi and Doran, Peter T. and Anderegg, William R. L. and Verheggen, Bart and Maibach, Ed W. and Carlton, J. Stuart and Lewandowsky, Stephan and Skuce, Andrew G. and Green, Sarah A. and Nuccitelli, Dana and Jacobs, Peter and Richardson, Mark and Winkler, Bärbel and Painting, Rob and Rice, Ken},
month = apr,
year = {2016},
note = {Publisher: IOP Publishing},
pages = {048002}
}

@article{powell_scientists_2017,
title = {Scientists {Reach} 100% {Consensus} on {Anthropogenic} {Global} {Warming}},
volume = {37},
issn = {0270-4676},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467619886266},
doi = {10.1177/0270467619886266},
abstract = {The consensus among research scientists on anthropogenic global warming has grown to 100\%, based on a review of 11,602 peer-reviewed articles on “climate change” and “global warming” published in the first 7 months of 2019.},
language = {en},
number = {4},
urldate = {2021-11-14},
journal = {Bulletin of Science, Technology \& Society},
author = {Powell, James},
month = dec,
year = {2017},
note = {Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc},
keywords = {anthropogenic global warming, climate, climate change, consensus, global warming},
pages = {183--184}
}

@article{lynas_greater_2021,
title = {Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature},
volume = {16},
issn = {1748-9326},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966},
doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966},
abstract = {While controls over the Earth’s climate system have undergone rigorous hypothesis-testing since the 1800s, questions over the scientific consensus of the role of human activities in modern climate change continue to arise in public settings. We update previous efforts to quantify the scientific consensus on climate change by searching the recent literature for papers sceptical of anthropogenic-caused global warming. From a dataset of 88125 climate-related papers published since 2012, when this question was last addressed comprehensively, we examine a randomized subset of 3000 such publications. We also use a second sample-weighted approach that was specifically biased with keywords to help identify any sceptical peer-reviewed papers in the whole dataset. We identify four sceptical papers out of the sub-set of 3000, as evidenced by abstracts that were rated as implicitly or explicitly sceptical of human-caused global warming. In our sample utilizing pre-identified sceptical keywords we found 28 papers that were implicitly or explicitly sceptical. We conclude with high statistical confidence that the scientific consensus on human-caused contemporary climate change—expressed as a proportion of the total publications—exceeds 99\% in the peer reviewed scientific literature.},
language = {en},
number = {11},
urldate = {2021-11-14},
journal = {Environmental Research Letters},
author = {Lynas, Mark and Houlton, Benjamin Z. and Perry, Simon},
month = oct,
year = {2021},
note = {Publisher: IOP Publishing},
pages = {114005}
}