‘A quick review of the first page of the paper was sufficient to raise doubts as to the accuracy of its results…’
(Michael Barnes, Liberty Headlines) A major climate change paper has been upended by a climate skeptic, using simple math.
The paper was published in Nature, one of the world’s most important scientific journals, by researchers from the University of California-San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography and Princeton University.
It purported to show that oceans temperatures have heated dramatically faster than previously thought, the reason, of course, being climate change.
Specifically, the paper said that oceans are now 60 percent warmer than figures provided by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — the gold standard for international climate alarmism.
Except there was just one problem: According to Nic Lewis, a critic of the catastrophic human-induced global warming consensus, the paper was wrong.
“The findings of the … paper were peer reviewed and published in the world’s premier scientific journal and were given wide coverage in the English-speaking media,” Lewis wrote on fellow skeptic Judith Curry’s blog, herself a persecuted scientist.
“Despite this, a quick review of the first page of the paper was sufficient to raise doubts as to the accuracy of its results,” Lewis said.
Ralph Keeling, a co-author of the paper, didn’t deny the error, but instead took responsibility for the gross over-estimation.
“When we were confronted with his insight it became immediately clear there was an issue there,” Keeling said.
Cal Beisner, founder of the Cornwall Alliance, said the mistake was obvious.
“It’s not as if the error involved some deep, mysterious, complicated matter that required a math genius to detect (though I suspect Lewis is one). Certainly not. It was a simple matter of division,” he said.
Lewis also explained that even if the paper’s main finding had been correct, its proposed policy recommendations couldn’t have scientifically solved the climate problems it was addressing.
The debunked paper received widespread media attention from major media outlets like the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN and the BBC — none of which have issued a correction or retraction of their original inaccurate reports, as of the publication of this story.