Peer Reviewed Studies That Deny Man Made Climate Change
Our squad of citizen science volunteers at Skeptical Science has published a new survey in the periodical Environmental Research Letters of over 12,000 peer-reviewed climate scientific discipline papers, equally the Guardian reports today. This is the most comprehensive survey of its kind, and the inspiration of this web log'due south proper name: Climate Consensus – the 97%.
The survey
In 2004, Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of 928 peer-reviewed climate papers published between 1993 and 2003, finding none that rejected the homo cause of global warming. We decided that it was time to expand upon Oreskes' work by performing a keyword search of peer-reviewed scientific periodical publications for the terms 'global warming' and 'global climate change' between the years 1991 and 2011.
Our squad agreed upon definitions of categories to put the papers in: explicit or implicit endorsement of man-caused global warming, no stance, and implicit or explicit rejection or minimization of the human influence, and began the long process of rating over 12,000 abstracts.
We decided from the outset to take a conservative approach in our ratings. For example, a report which takes information technology for granted that global warming volition continue for the foreseeable future could easily exist put into the implicit endorsement category; there is no reason to expect global warming to go along indefinitely unless humans are causing it. However, unless an abstract included language about the cause of the warming, nosotros categorized it as 'no opinion'.
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, USA, Canada, UK, New Zealand, Germany, Finland, and Italy.
Nosotros also decided that asking the scientists to rate their own papers would be the ideal way to check our results. Who knows what the papers say better than the authors who wrote them? Nosotros received responses from one,200 scientists who rated a total of over ii,100 papers. Unlike our team'southward ratings that simply considered the summary of each paper presented in the abstract, the scientists considered the unabridged paper in the self-ratings.
The results
Based on our abstract ratings, we found that just over 4,000 papers took a position on the cause of global warming, 97.1% of which endorsed human-caused global warming. In the scientist cocky-ratings, nearly i,400 papers were rated equally taking a position, 97.ii% of which endorsed human being-caused global warming. Many papers captured in our literature search only investigated an issue related to climate change without taking a position on its cause.
Our survey institute that the consensus has grown slowly over time, and reached about 98% as of 2011. Our results are also consistent with several previous surveys finding a 97% consensus amid climate experts on the human being cause of global warming.
Why is this important?
Several studies take shown that people who are enlightened of scientific consensus on human-caused global warming are more than likely to back up authorities action to curb greenhouse gas emissions. This was almost recently shown by a paper simply published in the periodical Climatic Change. People volition generally defer to the judgment of experts, and they trust climate scientists on the bailiwick of global warming.
All the same, vested interests accept long realized this and engaged in a campaign to misinform the public about the scientific consensus. For example, a memo from communications strategist Frank Luntz leaked in 2002 advised Republicans,
"Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views almost global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you lot need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate "
This campaign has been successful. A 2012 poll from US Pew Research Eye constitute less than half of Americans thought scientists agreed humans were causing global warming. The media has assisted in this public misconception, with most climate stories "balanced" with a "skeptic" perspective. All the same, this results in making the 2–3% seem like 50%. In trying to achieve "residual", the media has actually created a very unbalanced perception of reality. As a result, people believe scientists are nonetheless split about what'due south causing global warming, and therefore at that place is not about enough public support or motivation to solve the trouble.
Check our results for yourself
We chose to submit our newspaper to Environmental Research Letters considering it is a well-respected, loftier-bear upon journal, just also because it offers the selection of making a paper open admission, free for anyone to download.
We have also set up upwards a public ratings system at Skeptical Science where anybody can duplicate our survey. Read and charge per unit as many abstracts as yous like, and see what level of consensus y'all find. You can compare your results to our abstruse ratings, and to the author cocky-ratings.
Human being-caused global warming
Nosotros fully anticipate that climate contrarians will respond by maxim "nosotros don't dispute that humans cause some global warming." First, there are a lot of people who do dispute that humans crusade any global warming. Our paper shows that their position is not supported in the scientific literature.
Almost papers don't quantify the homo contribution to global warming, because it doesn't accept tens of thousands of papers to establish that reality. Even so, as noted to a higher place, if a newspaper minimized the human contribution, we classified that as a 'rejection'. For example, if a paper were to say "the sun caused most of the global warming over the by century," that would be included in the less than three% of papers rejecting or minimizing human-acquired global warming.
Many studies simply defer to the expert summary of climate science research put together past the Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic change (IPCC), which says that most of the global warming since the mid-20th century has been caused by humans. And according to contempo research, that argument is really besides conservative. Of the papers which specifically examine the contributors to global warming, they virtually all conclude that humans are the ascendant cause over the past l to 100 years.
Most studies simply accept this fact and go on to examine the consequences of this human-caused global warming and associated climatic change.
Another important point is that one time y'all accept that humans are causing global warming, you must also accept that global warming is withal happening. Nosotros cause global warming past increasing the greenhouse effect, and our greenhouse gas emissions just keep accelerating. This ties in to the fact that as recent inquiry 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 decision should non be at all controversial. Global warming cannot take suddenly stopped.
Spread the word
Given the importance of the scientific consensus on human being-caused global warming in peoples' decisions whether to support action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the public lack of awareness of the consensus, nosotros need to make people aware of these results. To that end, design and advertizing firm SJI Associates generously created a website pro-bono, centered around the results of our survey. The website can exist viewed at TheConsensusProject.com, and it includes a folio where consensus graphics can be shared via social media or email. Skeptical Scientific discipline also has a new page of consensus graphics.
Quite perchance the nigh important thing to communicate nigh 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 word and close the consensus gap.
kershawstareer1949.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/may/16/climate-change-scienceofclimatechange
0 Response to "Peer Reviewed Studies That Deny Man Made Climate Change"
Post a Comment