A research team confirms that 97
percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is caused by
humans. The group includes Sarah Green, a chemistry professor at
Michigan Technological University.
"What's important is that this is not just one study—it's the consensus of multiple studies," Green says. This consistency across studies contrasts with the language used by climate change
doubters. This perspective stems from, as the authors write,
"conflating the opinions of non-experts with experts and assuming that
lack of affirmation equals dissent."
Environmental Research Letters published the paper
this week. In it, the team lays out what they call "consensus on
consensus" and draws from seven independent consensus studies by the
co-authors. This includes a study from 2013,
in which the researchers surveyed more than 11,000 abstracts and found
most scientists agree that humans are causing climate change. Through
this new collaboration, multiple consensus researchers—and their data
gathered from different approaches—lead to essentially the same
conclusion.
The key factor comes down to expertise: The more expertise
in climate science the scientists have, the more they agree on
human-caused climate change.
Skeptic vs. Doubter
There are many surveys about climate change consensus. The
problem with some surveys, Green points out, is that they are biased
towards populations with predetermined points of view. Additionally,
respondents to some surveys lack scientific expertise in climate
science.
"The public has a very skewed view of how much disagreement
there is in the scientific community," she says. Only 12 percent of the
US public are aware there is such strong scientific agreement in this
area, and those who reject mainstream climate science
continue to claim that there is a lack of scientific consensus. People
who think scientists are still debating climate change do not see the
problem as urgent and are unlikely to support solutions.
This new paper is a rebuttal to a comment criticizing the
2013 paper. Green is quick to point out that skepticism, a drive to dig
deeper and seeking to better validate data, is a crucial part of the
scientific process.
The video will load shortly
"But climate change denial is not about scientific skepticism," she says.
Broader Impacts
Refuting climate change doubters is the main purpose
of a website Green contributes to called skepticalscience.com. The
website is run by the new study's lead author, John Cook from the
University of Queensland in Australia. He says consensus studies have
helped change political dialogue around climate change.
"The progress made at the United Nations Climate Change
Conference (COP21) in Paris late last year indicates that countries are
now well and truly behind the scientific consensus, too," Cook says.
Co-author Naomi Oreskes from Harvard University originally pursued consensus data about climate change
in 2004 and co-wrote Merchants of Doubt, which was turned into a
documentary in 2014. She says that this latest work places the findings
in the broader context of other research."By compiling and analyzing all of this research—essentially a meta-study of meta-studies—we've established a consistent picture with high levels of scientific agreement among climate experts," she says.
And among climate scientists, there's little doubt. There is consensus on consensus.
Explore further:
Scientists' role in swaying public opinion studied
More information:
John Cook et al. Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming, Environmental Research Letters (2016). DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
Post a Comment