The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Limits of Consensus
Abstract
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just delivered its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) since 1990. The IPCC was a bold innovation when it was established, and its accomplishments are singular. It was the conclusion in the IPCC First Assessment Report that the world is likely to see "a rate of increase of global mean temperature during the next century ... that is greater than seen over the past 10,000 years that proved influential in catalyzing the negotiation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The conclusions of the Second Assessment with regard to the human influence on climate marked a paradigm shift in the policy debate that contributed to the negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol. IPCC conclusions from the Third, and now the Fourth, assessments have further solidified consensus behind the role of humans in changing the earth's climate....
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3800.1 · Cited by 2,902
The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Oreskes, N. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1103618 · Cited by 1,814
Cited by
Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system
Lenton, T. M., Held, H., Kriegler, E., Hall, J. W., Lucht, W., Rahmstorf, S., & Schellnhuber, H. J. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0705414105 · Cited by 3,982
What Do We Know and Need to Know about the Environmental Outcomes of Collaborative Management?
Koontz, T. M., & Thomas, C. W. (2006) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00671.x · Cited by 696
Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet
Victor, D. G. (2011) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511975714 · Cited by 585
Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama?
Brysse, K., Oreskes, N., O’Reilly, J., & Oppenheimer, M. (2013) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.10.008 · Cited by 433
Self-citationBudescu, D. V., Broomell, S., & Por, H.-H. (2009) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02284.x · Cited by 402
Metadata
- Authors
- Oppenheimer, M., O'Neill, B. C., Webster, M., & Agrawala, S.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2007-09-14
- Volume
- 317
- Issue
- 5844
- Pages
- 1505-1506
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W2032924229
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 18.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Limits of Consensus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.1144831
- The paper
- Oppenheimer, M., O'Neill, B. C., Webster, M., & Agrawala, S. (2007). The Limits of Consensus. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1144831
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
