It is OK good the news. At present, it is unlikely that the Earth's oceans are 60% warmer than we thought (although they can still be so warm). As reported Los Angeles Times Today (on November 14, 2018) researchers with the UC San Diego Scripps Oceanographic and Princeton University authorities were forced to return to the widely reported scientific results – Nature last month – showing that the Earth's oceans heated faster than previously thought because of climate change.
October Nature noted that the oceans had warmed 60% more than the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). On November 6, mathematician Nic Lewis put his critique of this book on the Judith Curry blog. Both Lewis and Carrie are critics of the consensus of scientists that global warming is continuing and man-made.
In a November 6 blog, Lewis pointed to the mistakes of the October 31 document. The authors of the October 31 document now claim that they have modified their calculations and, although they conclude that the ocean is still warmer than the calculations used by the IPCC, they agree that they have "suppressed" the probability range. They can no longer support the previous statement on heat growth, which is 60% higher than indicated. They now say they are higher probability range, from 10% to 70%, as other studies have already found.
An adjustment has been submitted Nature.
The Los Angeles Times reported that one of the author's writings in the Ralph Keeling Scripps Institution for Oceanography – "wholly blamed" and thanked Lewis for warning him of an error. Keeling said in the Los Angeles Times:
When we encountered his insight, it became immediately apparent that there was a problem. We are grateful that it can be quickly pointed out so that we can quickly fix it.
Meanwhile, Twitter's verse today has come to expect in a situation like the one in which the widely reported and dramatic climatic event should have been left out. Many have comments like this:
We always knew that this was a waste, but would the globalist agree to the reality, or would he refuse it again? ** "We really understood the margin of error": the global warming report is worthless after scientists find the shortage in the ocean heat survey https://t.co/uVzwS7UE36
-? Chuck Patriot Santa Dude Nellis? (@NascarChuck336) November 14, 2018
But more importantly, there are cooler heads in Twitter and elsewhere in the media, indicating how it was necessary to point out again and again that science is not a "set of facts". Science is the process. Part of the scientists' knowledge is that other scientists in their work can find errors to prevent errors.
All scientists know this. Los Angeles explained this as follows:
While documents are reviewed before they are published, new discoveries must first be found before they are widely circulated across the scientific community …
The Times quoted Gerald Meehl, climate scientist at Berlinds Colorado National Atmospheric Research Center, stating:
This is the process that works. Each subsequent paper is not bullet-proof or infallible. If it is not subject to inspection, you check the findings.
Climate controversy reveals a scientific error in moving towards the largest ocean warming study.
Scientists do not talk about "fake news", they acknowledge the fault, fix the problem and continue … https://t.co/kL09DHRjqz
– Scott Anderson (@psychobiotic) November 14, 2018
Lower line: errors found in the document of 31 October 2018 published in 2008 Nature – suggests that the increase in the climate of the sea is 60% higher than estimated by the IPCC. Authors acknowledged this error and submitted an adjustment Nature.
October 31 paper in nature: quantitative determination of ocean heat absorption from atmospheric changes in O2 and CO2 composition
November 6 Nice Lewis Bad Report: A major problem with Resplandy and others. ocean heat reception paper