A study published in Environmental Research Letters quantifies the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed literature. The research analyzed 11,944 climate-related abstracts from 1991 to 2011, finding that 66.4% expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW, and 0.3% were uncertain. Among those expressing a position, 97.1% endorsed the consensus that humans are causing global warming. A second phase of the study invited authors to rate their own papers, revealing that 35.5% of self-rated papers expressed no position, while 97.2% of those expressing a position endorsed the consensus. Over time, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW slightly increased. The study found that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research. The analysis also showed that the percentage of self-rated endorsement papers increased over time, with both abstract ratings and self-ratings approaching approximately 98% endorsements in 2011. The study highlights the strong scientific consensus on AGW, despite public perception of disagreement. The research underscores the importance of accurate communication of scientific consensus to support climate policy. The findings suggest that the scientific community overwhelmingly agrees that human activity is causing global warming, with the majority of papers endorsing this view. The study also notes that the percentage of papers expressing a position on AGW has decreased over time, while the percentage of papers endorsing the consensus has increased. The results indicate that the scientific consensus on AGW is robust and well-established, with the majority of published research supporting the view that human activity is the primary cause of global warming.A study published in Environmental Research Letters quantifies the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed literature. The research analyzed 11,944 climate-related abstracts from 1991 to 2011, finding that 66.4% expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW, and 0.3% were uncertain. Among those expressing a position, 97.1% endorsed the consensus that humans are causing global warming. A second phase of the study invited authors to rate their own papers, revealing that 35.5% of self-rated papers expressed no position, while 97.2% of those expressing a position endorsed the consensus. Over time, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW slightly increased. The study found that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research. The analysis also showed that the percentage of self-rated endorsement papers increased over time, with both abstract ratings and self-ratings approaching approximately 98% endorsements in 2011. The study highlights the strong scientific consensus on AGW, despite public perception of disagreement. The research underscores the importance of accurate communication of scientific consensus to support climate policy. The findings suggest that the scientific community overwhelmingly agrees that human activity is causing global warming, with the majority of papers endorsing this view. The study also notes that the percentage of papers expressing a position on AGW has decreased over time, while the percentage of papers endorsing the consensus has increased. The results indicate that the scientific consensus on AGW is robust and well-established, with the majority of published research supporting the view that human activity is the primary cause of global warming.