{"id":269550,"date":"2023-07-26T19:59:31","date_gmt":"2023-07-26T17:59:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=269550"},"modified":"2023-07-26T19:59:33","modified_gmt":"2023-07-26T17:59:33","slug":"new-study-1900-2010-global-warming-so-uncertain-any-rate-or-magnitude-conclusion-impossible","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=269550","title":{"rendered":"New Study: 1900-2010 Global Warming So Uncertain Any Rate Or Magnitude Conclusion \u2018Impossible\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From NoTricksZone<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Kenneth Richard<\/a>\u00a0on\u00a0<\/em>24. July 2023<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe compilation of land- and sea-surface [thermometer] uncertainty yield a 1900-2010 global air-temperature record anomaly of 0.86 \u00b1 1.92\u00b0C (2 \u03c3), which renders impossible any conclusion regarding the rate or magnitude of climate warming since 1850 or earlier.\u201d \u2013 Dr. Patrick Frank (2023)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The global surface air temperature record is so contaminated by systematic error (due to solar irradiance, wind speed, albedo reflectance, thermometer physical inadequacies, drift\u2026) that is impossible to distinguish the contaminated from the valid temperatures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The built-in \u00b1 1.92\u00b0C \u201crange of ignorance\u201d in estimating the global temperature changes since 1900 cannot be reduced by averaging, as the errors are clearly not randomly distributed, but instead strongly related to contaminating environmental factors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A summarizing estimate of the global temperature change since 1900, including the range of ignorance due to error, indicates the 30-year trend was 1.82\u00b0C per century from 1971-2000, but 0.0\u00b0C per century during 1981-2010, and 1.23\u00b0C per century from 1911-1940.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cFor SSTs, the available bucket and engine-intake field calibrations show that shipboard SST measurement errors are, likewise, not random. The uncertainties attached to bucket SSTs, 2\u03c3 = \u00b10.4\u00b0C and engine-intake SSTs 2\u03c3\u00a0 = \u00b12\u00b0C\u2026\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cEach of the engine-intake calibrations yielded a bias and uncertainty of 0.3 \u00b11.2\u00b0C (1\u03c3), which obviates accuracy.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe magnitude of the SST error mean itself remains unknown.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe results indicated that a shipboard bucket seawater sample will not accurately convey the physically true sea-surface temperature unless three conditions are simultaneously true: (1) the thermocline is absent; (2) the vessel is heading into the wind; and (3) the mixing layer extends well below the depth of the keel.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Image Source:\u00a0Frank, 2023<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Image Source:\u00a0Frank, 2023<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n