<! – –
Here is da news. It is less certain today that the Earth's oceans are 60% warmer than what we thought (although they can still be a warmth). As reported in the Los Angeles Times Today (November 14, 2018), researchers with the San Francisco U.S. Scripps Oceanographic Institute and Princeton University have to walk back a widely reported scientific result – based on published paper Nature Last month – shows that the oceans of the Earth have been dramatically heating faster than what they thought of, as a result of climate change.
October 31 paper in Nature the oceans have warmed 60% more than outlined by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). On 6 November, mathematician Nic Lewis posted his criticism on the paper in Judith Curry's blog. Lewis and Curry are critics of the scientific consensus that global warming continues and that people are being caused.
In his blog post, November 6, Lewis noted defects in the October 31 paper. The paper authors of October 31 now say that they have made their calculations, and – although they find that the sea is still warmer than warmer than & The estimate used by the IPCC – they agree that they are "miffed" of the probability range. They can no longer support the earlier statement of heat increase 60% more than what was stated. They now say that a A greater range of probabilities, between 10% and 70%, as other studies found.
He was sent a correction Nature.
The Los Angeles Times said that one of the co-authors on the paper – Ralph Keeling at the Scripps Oceanic Institute – "had taken full blame" and thanked Lewis for notifying him of the mistake. Keeling told Los Angeles Times:
When we were in sight, it became clear that there was a problem there. We are grateful to have the attention quickly and quickly so that we can correct it quickly.
Meanwhile, Twitter-verse today has made the expectation in such a situation, where it has to be widespread and dramatically reported in the climate. Many comment in this way:
We always knew it was rubbish but will the globalists agree with a reality or will it reject it again? ** We're Really Mffed The Margins Error: Global Warming Report Missing Unnecessarily After Scientists Survey In Ocean Heating Survey Https://t.co/uVzwS7UE36
– ?? Chuck Patriot Santa Dude Nellis ?? (@ NascarChuck336) November 14, 2018
But cooler heads on Twitter and elsewhere in the media are also pressing, stating – as again points were needed – science is not a "fact body". Science is a process. Part of the reason that scientists publish is so that other scientists can find errors in their work, so that errors can be corrected.
Each scientist knows this. Los Angeles Times explained this way like this:
Although papers are being reviewed by peers before they have been published, new findings must always be reproduced before receiving a broad reception through the scientific community …
The Times Gerald Meehl, a climate scientist quoted at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, as he said:
Here's how the process works. Not all emerging papers are crowded or inflexible. If you do not stand under scrutiny, you're reviewing the findings.
Object objects reveal a scientific error, upgrade a large ocean warming study.
Scientists do not cry "fake news", they get blameless, solve the problem and move on … https://t.co/kL09DHRjqz
– Scott Anderson (@Psychobiotic) November 14, 2018
Bottom: There was an error in the paper October 31, 2018 published in Nature – shows an increase in oceanic warming 60% more than what is estimated by the IPCC. The authors have acknowledged the error, and they have been corrected Nature.
Paper October 31 in Nature: Number of people receiving sea heat from changes in atmospheric composition O2 and CO2
Posted on November 6 by Nic Lewis: A big problem with Resplandy et al. seafood reception paper