• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Major Math Error Puts Widely-Cited Global Warming Study On Ice

KLATTU

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
12,695
Reaction score
4,090
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...ohedge.com&utm_term=69017&utm_content=2308590

The report was covered or referenced by MSM outlets worldwide, including the Washington Post, New York Times, BBC, Reuters and others.

The Washington Post, for example, reported: "The higher-than-expected amount of heat in the oceans means more heat is being retained within Earth’s climate system each year, rather than escaping into space. In essence, more heat in the oceans signals that global warming is more advanced than scientists thought."

The New York Times at least hedged their reporting, claiming that the estimates, "if proven accurate, could be another indication that the global warming of the past few decades has exceeded conservative estimates and has been more closely in line with scientists’ worst-case scenarios."

Unfortunately for the Princeton-Scripps team, it appears that their report has been proven inaccurate.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent



Resplandy et al. Part 2: Regression in the presence of trend and scale systematic errors

Posted on November 7, 2018 by niclewis | 100 comments
by Nic Lewis
In a recent article I set out why I thought that the trend in ΔAPOClimate was overstated, and its uncertainty greatly understated, in the Resplandy et al. ocean heat uptake study. In this article I expand on the brief explanation of the points made about “trend errors” and “scale systematic errors” given in my original article, as these are key issues involved in estimating the trend in ΔAPOClimateand its uncertainty.
Continue reading

 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
From the comments in the link at #3:

curryja [FONT=&quot]| November 8, 2018 at 1:44 pm | Reply[/FONT]
Resplandy now has a statement on her website: resplandy.princeton.edu
“We are aware the way we handled the errors underestimated the uncertainties. We are working on an update that addresses this issue. We thank Nicholas Lewis for bringing this to our attention.”
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
From the comments in the link at #3:

Joe H [FONT=&quot]| November 10, 2018 at 4:56 pm | Reply[/FONT]
Seems like they are startig to recognise the issues in the paper. Latest at one of the paper’s co-authors (https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/study-ocean-warming-detected-atmospheric-gas-measurements) is as follows:
Note from co-author Ralph Keeling Nov. 9, 2018: I am working with my co-authors to address two problems that came to our attention since publication. These problems, related to incorrectly treating systematic errors in the O2 measurements and the use of a constant land O2:C exchange ratio of 1.1, do not invalidate the study’s methodology or the new insights into ocean biogeochemistry on which it is based. We expect the combined effect of these two corrections to have a small impact on our calculations of overall heat uptake, but with larger margins of error. We are redoing the calculations and preparing author corrections for submission to Nature.
Gavin Schmidt has also been tweeting about it – mind you he refers t it as a ‘minor issue in the Resplandy et al discussion’!
Interestingly, neither Keeling nor Resplandy make any reference to the OLS regression mean trend mis-calculation that Nic identified.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
47,463
Reaction score
13,904
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...ohedge.com&utm_term=69017&utm_content=2308590

The report was covered or referenced by MSM outlets worldwide, including the Washington Post, New York Times, BBC, Reuters and others.

The Washington Post, for example, reported: "The higher-than-expected amount of heat in the oceans means more heat is being retained within Earth’s climate system each year, rather than escaping into space. In essence, more heat in the oceans signals that global warming is more advanced than scientists thought."

The New York Times at least hedged their reporting, claiming that the estimates, "if proven accurate, could be another indication that the global warming of the past few decades has exceeded conservative estimates and has been more closely in line with scientists’ worst-case scenarios."

Unfortunately for the Princeton-Scripps team, it appears that their report has been proven inaccurate.

And it will be business as normal with the media. The will run and run and run with stories that sensationalize things, but don't expect to see them print a single retraction.

No wonder the left side of the isle voter is so ignorant. They let the media tell them what to believe.
 

KLATTU

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
12,695
Reaction score
4,090
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
And it will be business as normal with the media. The will run and run and run with stories that sensationalize things, but don't expect to see them print a single retraction.

No wonder the left side of the isle voter is so ignorant. They let the media tell them what to believe.

Oh you know what it'll be. No big deal .Doesn't change anything. And not just the media but within the (lw ) science community.

They'll circle the wagons .Remember Climate gate ?
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
47,463
Reaction score
13,904
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Oh you know what it'll be. No big deal .Doesn't change anything. And not just the media but within the (lw ) science community.

They'll circle the wagons .Remember Climate gate ?

I remember well how the faithful to the dogma believe whatever excuse and lies their prophets tell them. There is no breaking the faith of their religion. Facts don't matter.
 

Steve Case

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
1,198
Location
USA - Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...ohedge.com&utm_term=69017&utm_content=2308590

The report was covered or referenced by MSM outlets worldwide, including the Washington Post, New York Times, BBC, Reuters and others.

The Washington Post, for example, reported: "The higher-than-expected amount of heat in the oceans means more heat is being retained within Earth’s climate system each year, rather than escaping into space. In essence, more heat in the oceans signals that global warming is more advanced than scientists thought."

The New York Times at least hedged their reporting, claiming that the estimates, "if proven accurate, could be another indication that the global warming of the past few decades has exceeded conservative estimates and has been more closely in line with scientists’ worst-case scenarios."

Unfortunately for the Princeton-Scripps team, it appears that their report has been proven inaccurate.



You Tube "I'm shocked!" Casablance

Indeed shocking news

from my collection of smart remarks and quotes:

If the Climate Change headline says,
"Worse than previously thought"
Historical data is being re-written.​

Or in some fashion fudged, dry labbed, gun decked, pencil whipped or just plain wrong.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Sunsettommy

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,709
Reaction score
875
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Has the paper been withdrawn?

I see that warmists avoid this thread completely, how interesting.

Cheers.
 
Top Bottom