They forgot to install the Fix for Windoze Math Error 25 or whatever years ago.
Posted on 11/15/2018 3:52:28 AM PST by RoosterRedux
A highly circulated study claiming oceans are warming at a much higher rate due to global warming contains "key errors," forcing researchers to issue a correction.
The study published by the journal Nature on Oct. 31 by researchers at Princeton University and UC San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography claimed the oceans were warming at a rate 60 percent higher than previously thought.
However, a mathematical error discovered by independent climate scientist Nic Lewis after he perused the study's first page has led the journal to retract its key finding. The study has a much larger margin of error, making their findings of a 60 percent increase in ocean warming less precise, and actually between 10 percent and 70 percent.
The lead researcher now says its findings are practically meaningless, with a margin of error "too big now to really weigh in" on ocean temperatures.
When first published, the study led to "alarming" warnings in mainstream media outlets, claiming the "world has seriously underestimated the amount of heat soaked up by our oceans over the past 25 years."
CNN initially reported the planet is "‘more sensitive' than thought" based on the study and would lead to "more dire" predictions than the U.N.'s latest, which gave Earth only 12 more years.
CNN has since reported "errors were made" but is still defending the study claiming its scientific errors "do not invalidate the study's methodology."
The Washington Post is now reporting the scientists made "key errors."
"A major study claimed the oceans were warming much faster than previously thought," the paper reported. "But researchers now say they can't necessarily make that claim."
"Unfortunately, we made mistakes here," said Ralph Keeling, a Scripps researcher and coauthor of the study, adding the mathematical error means a "much larger margin of error in the findings."
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
#19 is for you
A temperature change of .016 degree per century, vs .01 degree / century is still a 60% change. But "SIXTY PERCENT" is a far more attention-getting figure....
“So...no fish stew? What do I do with all these oyster crackers?”
Crush them up, take them to a libs house and toss the crackers in the yard. The birds will do the rest.
Barbie: “Math is hard.”
They forgot to install the Fix for Windoze Math Error 25 or whatever years ago.
“State of Fear” by Crichton is all about that. It exposes the political and money motivations and the tactics behind most causes to “save the planet”.
Well worth a read.
Is there a list of global warming science fails anywhere?
Or worse yet imagine measuring the change in ocean levels within millimeters (as they claim to do) with the constant perturbations of changing waves, tides, winds... in all the different locations.
Somewhere in the world right now there is a climatologist going “ oh crap, i forgot to carry the 3”.
When folks refers to "scientists" in this context, what they really mean is "data scientist".
I was interested enough in the field that I am getting a second Master of Science in Data Science.
Correction= We got caught.
Please explain how they are measuring subsurface temperatures from space.
The only way you can PROVE Global Warming is with Mathematics. And the neat thing about math is is cannot be based upon opinion but must be mathematically correct. We are now learning the mathematics DISproves the theory of Global Warming. With the error included, there is global warming for the oceans. Take out the error and there is no global warming of the oceans. These “scientists” are giving us all the proof we need that this is a hoax...mathematics proves it.
They would bring in a math expert but the count is busy down in Florida.
Other than the fact that it is physically impossible for the atmosphere to heat the ocean for small reasons like the ocean has over 1000 times the heat capacity of the atmosphere. But also long wave (thermal) radiation does not penetrate the surface of water past a few milimeters. The only way to heat water is with sunlight that penetrates a few hundred feet. The water effects the atmosphere, not vice versa.
I agree. And there are some that think it cost him his life.
I gave you a clue, so go figure it out yourself.
The global warming scam is much greater.
My takeaway is the IPCC can't be rescued from it's past near-frauds no matter how well-intentioned the participants, because they refuse to identify or acknowledge the consequence of such mistakes while still recommending action based on their "findings".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.