Older people more likely to die during heat waves in colder parts of the U.S. — plus, the global inequality of climate change, How they did it: News collaboration exposes how special interests use ‘model’ legislation, The 2019 JR staff picks: Our favorite tip sheets, stories and research roundups, Extremely hot weather during pregnancy poses health risks to mothers and infants, These 2 factors drive meat consumption worldwide, Carbon taxes + cap and trade = Tackling climate change like an economist, The mental health effects of climate change, 6 studies that will make you smarter about the G-20 summit, Global warming has worsened economic inequality and made some rich countries richer, You are free to republish this piece both online and in print, and we encourage you to do so with the embed code provided below. Your browser will redirect to your requested content shortly. This article first appeared on Journalist's Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license. This divide is even starker when considering the top researchers in each group. This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107/-/DCSupplemental. are licensed under a Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0) license. The study’s authors, from Stanford University, the University of … A 2010 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change,” analyzed the research patterns and scholarly citations of 1,372 climate scientists who publish in this field. Tweet Widget; Facebook Like; Mendeley; Submit. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences, www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107/-/DCSupplemental, Likelihood of life and intelligence emerging, Opinion: We have been in lockdown, but deforestation has not. Expert credibility in climate change. William R. L. Anderegg, James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, Stephen H. Schneider. Sign up for the PNAS Highlights … Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jun 2010, 201003187; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003187107 . About 97% of the group with the most expertise — the 908 climate scientists with 20 or more papers published — are convinced by the evidence of human-induced climate change. This has prompted media researchers in this area to note a trend of “false balance” in some reporting. Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS. A study suggests that tropical cyclones have been increasing in intensity over the past four decades, consistent with predictions of physical theory and numerical simulations. and J.W.P. The National Institute for Health Care Management (NIHCM) Foundation. Share This Article: Copy. Of these, 908 scientists had published 20 or more climate-related papers. Bayesian analysis of the chronology of life’s emergence and development on Earth suggests that if Earth’s history were repeated, the emergence of intelligence might be a sufficiently rare event that it would not be guaranteed to reoccur. Author contributions: W.R.L.A.


“Despite media tendencies to present both sides in [human-induced climate change] debates,” the authors conclude, “which can contribute to continued public misunderstanding … not all climate researchers are equal in scientific credibility and expertise in the climate system. This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Please contact us here. performed research; W.R.L.A. The authors declare no conflict of interest. Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0).

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. Please enable Cookies and reload the page. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.
A broad analysis of the climate scientist … In any case, a small minority of scientists do express some degree of doubt about this consensus, and they have often been given prominence in the public debate. Despite media tendencies to present both sides in ACC … We only ask that you follow a few basic guidelines. wrote the paper.