Climate 'Science' Laugh of the Week

By -
A colleague passed along a criticism of this article and he has a point. I was not clear. I am criticizing the New Science article, not the paper itself. Specifically, this language:

It's worse than we thought. Scientists may have hugely underestimated the extent of global warming because temperature readings from southern hemisphere seas were inaccurate.
Comparisons of direct measurements with satellite data and climate models suggest that the oceans of the southern hemisphere have been sucking up more than twice as much of the heat trapped by our excess greenhouse gases than previously calculated. This means we may have underestimated the extent to which our world has been warming.
It is written present tense for a study that ended in 2003 which isn't mentioned until the end of article (i.e., a reader would be misled unless they read well into the article). The article is nonsense. That said, I apologize for the confusion as to where my criticism was directed. 


Original Posting: 

They desperation of the global warming cult grows by the week. This 'study' says,

The study covers the period from 1970 to 2003. Cai says that, during that time, while the northern hemisphere has been well sampled by cargo ships and projects led by wealthy countries north of the equator, very few direct measurements have been taken in the south. So it's not surprising that the in-situ measurements have been wrong. "But this is huge," says Cai.

Ah, it is late 2014.

The study cherry-picked a period that omitted the cool temperatures before the and the lack of warming after (below).
But, it is worse than that. The study ends during the period when the worldwide ARGO network to measure ocean temperatures was deployed. There is better data after the time of the study!

Comments

  1. JayTeeOctober 10, 2014 at 8:44 AM

    In your post, you refers to the New Scientist post here:

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26317-the-world-is-warming-faster-than-we-thought.html

    You seem to critique the article and the study referred to for not using the Argos data, as well as for the time period under study. In the New Scientist article, the use of newer Argos data is mentioned at the end:

    "Since around 2000, a network of buoys called the Argo floats have been collecting more accurate global ocean data, so more recent measurements of the southern hemisphere are more reliable."

    Furthermore, if you read the paper by Durack referred to in the New Scientist article, there is a different message.

    Journal reference: Nature Climate Change, DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE2389

    The study looks at potential underestimation of ocean heat uptake in the southern hemisphere before Argos measurements, pre-2004. The authors compare altimeter measurements, in situ measurements and CMIP5 hindcasts to conclude that in situ measurements of SST in the southern hemisphere during this period may have significantly underestimated ocean heat content in the southern hemisphere in the pre-Argos era. They mention in the first paragraph,

    "Recent estimates of OHC (Ocean Heat Content) change attempt to address sampling deficiencies by relying on coincident sea surface height (SSH) estimates or the modern Argos array."

    The authors of the Nature Climate Change article specifically were analyzing the period before the Argos data became available and state,

    "We analyse the 35-year period (1970-2004) over which both the CMIP5 'historical' data are available and during which observational deficiencies are small enough to yeild reliable OHC chnages, at least in the Northern Hemisphere."

    Later in the paper, the authors state

    "This shift in the observed OHC trend is consistent with increasing influence of Argo data after 2004, at which point in-situ measurements begin to provide near-global coverage."

    Careful reading of the paper cited should, therefore, explain the time period studied as a well defined climatological period with accompanying CMIP5 data sets as well as the need to reevaluate pre-Argo OHC and SST measurements. Secondarily, both the New Scientist article and the Nature Climate Change paper acknowledge that the Argo data set gives a better estimate of SST, especially in the Southern Hemisphere.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mike SmithOctober 10, 2014 at 10:06 AM

    Thank you for the comment and it is possible I have misconstrued the thrust of the paper. However, it is nonsensical to claim that "warming" (present tense) is "worse than we thought" for a paper with a data period that ended 11 years ago.

    To be fair to all concerned, I am going to review the paper itself and I have invited additional commentary. Stay tuned.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Hilary's Forecast Path Shifts West; Updated 9:20am PDT

By -
Image
The forecast path of the center of Hilary has shifted a bit to the west. This increases the threat to the Southland, especially in terms of flooding.  Rainfall Note the heavy rains are forecast for Los Angeles County. Serious flash flooding may result. Because the forecast path has shifted to the west, that increases the threat of serious flooding in Los Angeles County north into Yosemite and the southern Sierra. It lessens the threat in Utah and western Arizona. While the threat of widespread flooding in Utah and Arizona lessens, note that some thunderstorms with localized heavy rain show up on the map.  In Nevada, the more western path increases the risk of serious flooding around Mt Charleston and into the central part of the state.  Here is the updated  (9am PDT) flash flood risk map. Wind There are already about 40,000 people without power in California, mostly in the center of the state.  The maps above are the peak gusts forecasted with the storm. The highest winds, in general,
Read more

Dangerous Travel Conditions - People Reportedly Stranded

By -
Image
-- Note, more current info available. Scroll up. --- Updated Information as of 8am PDT You are risking your life if you attempt to travel through the purple area.  While the rain has not begun in coastal California, I would urge you to use this time to make any preparations. Power outages have occurred already in southeast California. Here is the latest radar as of 7:55am PDT. As of 6:40am PDT , the radar indicates moderate to heavy rain falling over desert areas of Southern California and far western Arizona (click to enlarge).  Rainfall amounts for the 24 hours ending at 7am PDT show more than two inches have already fallen. There are reports from reliable sources that roads are already washed out and that people are stranded in isolated parts of the desert.  Below is a high-resolution computer model's rainfall forecast from 5am PDT to 11pm PDT Sunday. More than a foot of additional rain is forecast to fall. This will lead to catastrophic flooding.  Here is a map of current watc
Read more

Update on Tornado and Wind Potential; 12 Noon PDT

By -
Image
There was at least one tornado and at least one funnel cloud yesterday.  --- original forecast --- Hilary (the swirly symbol) continues to move NNW paralleling the coast of Baja California, Mexico. The area outlined in red has a significant risk of tornadoe s the rest of the afternoon.  Below is a list of peak wind gusts so far.  Peak winds may increase farther north as the afternoon progresses.  Addition at 12 noon PDT: Sure enough, winds have increased.  Note: If you are in the San Diego area, I recommend not  traveling east on I-8. Heavy rains may cause flash flooding that will involve the highway. 
Read more