This paper is vacated, as a scientific product, given that it included psychology papers, and also given that it twice lied about its method (claiming not to count social science papers, and claiming to use independent raters), and the professed cheating by the raters. It was essentially voided by its invalid method of using partisan and unqualified political activists to subjectively rate climate science abstracts on the issue on which their activism centers -- a stunning and unprecedented method. I'm awaiting word on retraction from the journal, but I think we already know that this paper is vacated. It doesn't represent knowledge of the consensus.
The IPCC’s AR5 attribution statement: 'It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate of the human induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.'
The reasoning process used by the IPCC in assessing confidence in its attribution statement is described by this statement from the AR4: “The approaches used in detection and attribution research described above cannot fully account for all uncertainties, and thus ultimately expert judgement is required to give a calibrated assessment of whether a specific cause is responsible for a given climate change.'
Curry: 'The attribution statement itself is at best imprecise and at worst ambiguous: what does “most” mean – 51% or 99%? Whether it is 51% or 99% would seem to make a rather big difference regarding the policy response.'
'The IPCC’s attribution statement does not seem logically consistent with the uncertainty in climate sensitivity.'
'I am arguing that climate models are not fit for the purpose of detection and attribution of climate change on decadal to multidecadal timescales.'
New York Times - June 29, 1976: 'Cool periods produce greater climate instability. Climatic events are then more extreme. Climate is a worldwide, integrated system. Significant changes cannot take place in one part without other changes occurring in other places.'
Examples of past incorrect 'consensus': Copernicus, Galileo and the Sun
Ernst Chladni and meteorites
Barry Marshall and stomach ulcers.
Wegener and continental drift.
Cholera and John Snow
Semmelweis, hand-washing and puerperal fever
'The magnitude and sign of the future carbon balance of the Arctic are highly uncertain...some models showing Alaska as a strong carbon sink, others as a strong carbon source, while still others as carbon neutral.'