READ

Studies in Conversation


  • AUTHORS:
    Rob Painting
    Bärbel Winkler
    Mark Richardson
    Sarah A Green
    Dana Nuccitelli
    John Cook et al
    PUBLISHED:
    2013 in Environmental Research Letters
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    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 po...
  • AUTHOR:
    Richard S J Tol
    PUBLISHED:
    2016 in Environmental Research Letters
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    This critique was submitted by:
    LCheng
    Cook et al's highly influential consensus study (2013 Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024) finds different results than previous studies in the consensus literature. It omits tests for systematic differences between raters. Many abstracts are unaccounted for. The paper does not discuss the procedures us...
  • AUTHOR:
    Richard S.J. Tol
    PUBLISHED:
    2014 in Energy Policy
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    This critique was submitted by:
    LCheng
    A claim has been that 97% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). This claim, frequently repeated in debates about climate policy, does not stand. A trend in composition is mistaken for a trend in endorsement. Reported...
  • AUTHOR:
    Benjamin John Floyd Dean
    PUBLISHED:
    2015 in Environmental Research Letters
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    This critique was submitted by:
    LCheng
    I read the study by Cook et al with great interest [1]. The study used levels of endorsement of global warming as outlined in their table 2; however, I could see no mention as to how these levels were created and how reliable they were in terms of both inter-rater and intra-rater reliability (Coh...
  • AUTHOR:
    Richard S J Tol
    PUBLISHED:
    2016 in Environmental Research Letters
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    This critique was submitted by:
    LCheng
    Cook et al's highly influential consensus study (2013 Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024) finds different results than previous studies in the consensus literature. It omits tests for systematic differences between raters. Many abstracts are unaccounted for. The paper does not discuss the procedures us...
  • AUTHORS:
    Peter Jacobs
    Dana Nuccitelli
    Naomi Oreskes
    John Cook
    Stephan Lewandowsky
    Ken Rice et al
    PUBLISHED:
    2016 in Environmental Research Letters
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    This critique was submitted by:
    LCheng
    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 1...
  • AUTHORS:
    John Cook
    Kevin Cowtan
    PUBLISHED:
    2015 in Environmental Research Letters
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    This critique was submitted by:
    LCheng
    Inter-rater reliability statistics may be trivially calculated from the released data available at www.skepticalscience.com/docs/tcp_allratings.txt. We have placed R-code for this calculation on the project website at www.skepticalscience.com/docs/interrating.r. The unweighted Cohen kappa is 0.35...
  • AUTHORS:
    Rob Honeycutt
    Rob Painting
    Peter Jacobs
    Andrew Skuce
    Dana Nuccitelli
    John Cook et al
    PUBLISHED:
    2014 in Energy Policy
    (Highly Regarded Source)
    This critique was submitted by:
    LCheng
    Cook et al. (2013) (C13) found that 97% of relevant climate papers endorse anthropogenic global warming (AGW), consistent with previous independent studies. Tol (in press) (T14) agrees that the scientific literature ‘overwhelmingly supports’ AGW, but disputes C13′s methods. We show that T14′s cla...
READ

Studies in Conversation

AUTHORS:
Rob Painting
Bärbel Winkler
Mark Richardson
Sarah A Green
Dana Nuccitelli
John Cook et al
We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11...
AUTHOR:
Richard S J Tol
Cook et al's highly influential consensus study (2013 Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024) finds different results than previous studies in the consensus ...
AUTHOR:
Richard S.J. Tol
A claim has been that 97% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). Th...
AUTHOR:
Benjamin John Floyd Dean
I read the study by Cook et al with great interest [1]. The study used levels of endorsement of global warming as outlined in their table 2; howeve...
AUTHOR:
Richard S J Tol
Cook et al's highly influential consensus study (2013 Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024) finds different results than previous studies in the consensus ...
AUTHORS:
Peter Jacobs
Dana Nuccitelli
Naomi Oreskes
John Cook
Stephan Lewandowsky
Ken Rice et al
The consensus that humans are causing recent global warming is shared by 90%–100% of publishing climate scientists according to six independent stu...
AUTHORS:
John Cook
Kevin Cowtan
Inter-rater reliability statistics may be trivially calculated from the released data available at www.skepticalscience.com/docs/tcp_allratings.txt...
AUTHORS:
Rob Honeycutt
Rob Painting
Peter Jacobs
Andrew Skuce
Dana Nuccitelli
John Cook et al
Cook et al. (2013) (C13) found that 97% of relevant climate papers endorse anthropogenic global warming (AGW), consistent with previous independent...