The 97 Consensus: How Valid is the Scientific Agreement on Man-Made Climate Change?

When discussing the validity of climate change and its causes, a claim often cited is the 97 consensus among climate scientists. This claim suggests that there is a strong agreement among climate scientists that human activities are a significant driver of climate change. This article delves into the origins, implications, and criticisms of this consensus.

Key Points About the 97 Consensus

Source of the Consensus

The 97 consensus primarily originates from a study published in 2013 by John Cook and colleagues. This study, which reviewed thousands of peer-reviewed climate papers, found that among those expressing a position on the cause of global warming, about 97 percent endorsed the view that human activities are a significant driver of climate change.

Subsequent Research

Other studies have supported the existence of a strong consensus. A 2016 study, for instance, found that 90-100 percent of actively publishing climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is happening. These studies provide a robust foundation for the 97 consensus, indicating a high level of agreement among climate scientists.

Nature of the Consensus

The consensus does not imply that every scientist agrees on all aspects of climate science. Instead, it reflects an overwhelming agreement on the fundamental understanding that human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation, are major contributors to climate change. This agreement is important for policy discussions and public understanding, as it underscores the scientific community's strong agreement on the reality of climate change and its anthropogenic causes.

Implications

The 97 consensus is significant for several reasons. It serves as a crucial foundation for policy discussions, providing policymakers with a clear and consistent scientific basis for addressing climate change. Additionally, it helps to educate the public about the reality of climate change and its anthropogenic causes, which is essential for garnering public support and action.

Criticism and Misinterpretation

Critics of the 97 consensus often argue that it oversimplifies the complexity of climate science or misrepresents dissenting views. However, the overwhelming majority of climate scientists who publish research in the field strongly support the consensus view. These criticisms often stem from a lack of understanding or misrepresentation of the consensus, rather than from genuine scientific disagreement.

Public Perception

Despite the high level of scientific agreement, public perception often does not align with the consensus. Segments of the population remain skeptical about climate change and its causes, which highlights the challenge of communicating scientific consensus to the general public.

Conclusion

The 97 consensus is supported by a robust body of research and reflects the views of the majority of climate scientists. It serves as an important foundation for understanding the urgency of addressing climate change through policy and action. While the consensus is robust, efforts to communicate this scientific agreement to the public are crucial for fostering understanding and action.

Keywords: 97 Consensus, Climate Change Consensus, Man-Made Climate Change