This paper presents an analysis of the closure of visible disputes in the assessments of climate change in the Netherlands. We focus primarily on two key constituents of the assessments: the estimate of climate sensitivity and the inclusion of non-CO2greenhouse gases in assessment studies. For the cases studied, we identify variability in the assessment reports in the Netherlands during the pre-IPCC period. In the Netherlands arena, the assessments in this period can be seen as exponents of two different lines, a Netherlands line and an international line. We seek to identify what factors were decisive in the selection processes that resulted in the closure of visible disputes (visible in or across the assessment reports) for both cases. Our analysis reveals a remarkable difference in the adoption behavior of two Dutch assessment groups despite a large overlap in membership. We provide evidence that it is not the paradigmatic predisposition of the experts in the committee that was decisive for the closure of visible disputes, but it was the context in which the experts operated and the commitments they had made in each setting.