Claim: But the central message of the IPCC AR4, is confirmed by the peer reviewed literature.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: Scientific consensus is normally achieved through communication at conferences, publication in the scientific literature, replication (reproducible results by others), and peer review.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: Global Change Research Program, over the scientific consensus shown by the IPCC report and about the peer reviewed status of the papers it cited.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: It is designed to be a powerful, scientifically authoritative document of high policy relevance, which will be a major contribution to the discussions at the 13th Conference of the Parties in Bali during December 2007.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: The IPCC was tasked with reviewing peer-reviewed scientific literature and other relevant publications to provide information on the state of knowledge about climate change.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: Synthesis reports are assessments of scientific literature that compile the results of a range of stand-alone studies in order to achieve a broad level of understanding, or to describe the state of knowledge of a given subject.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The IPCC bases its assessment on the published literature, which includes peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The key message and supporting text summarizes extensive evidence documented in the peer-reviewed detection and attribution literature, including in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Detection and attribution of climate signals, as well as its common-sense meaning, has a more precise definition within the climate change literature, as expressed by the IPCC.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: It would be correct to describe a scientist who was involved with AR4 or earlier IPCC reports in this way: 'X contributed to the reports of the IPCC, which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The 2007 Fourth Assessment Report compiled by the IPCC (AR4) noted that "changes in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and aerosols, land cover and solar radiation alter the energy balance of the climate system", and concluded that "increases in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations is very likely to have caused most of the increases in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century".

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The IPCC explains this as follows:

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The report endorsed findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as representing the views of the scientific community:

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: It recognizes that warming of the climate system is scientifically verified and that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid twentieth century are very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations, as assessed by the IPCC in its Fourth Assessment Report.