Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
Retracting ocean quantification doesn't tell us anything.Was it superceded by more current,more accurate information? There's a liklihood that the data was 2-years obsolete when it came out in the IPCC report.Do they provide some magnitude of error? The oceans have a 100-year lag-time with respect to atmospheric CO2 concentration.Have new models refined this value?
As to temperature increase,the range is as high as 11-degrees F climate sensitivity to a doubling of greenhouse gases.
As to the Middle East,and other foreign imports,gasoline in American tanks may be sourced from: Bahrain,Iran,Iraq,Kuwait,Qatar,Saudi Arabia,United Arab Emirates,Neutral Zone,Algeria,Angola,Nigeria,and Canada,at a rate of 1,362,180,000 barrels a year,as of 2017.
|
It was retracted in nature, it wasn't made obsolete or superceded. So it was at least junk science and incompetence, at worse possibly fraud. It was described as systemic errors in data collection and inconsistencies in testing methods.
Retracted in nature is bad. You are not going to spin this one into less than what it is.
So the study is going to have to be completely redone. Which means the results would be completely different.
To assign an order of magnitude to the error would be pure speculation.
If man made global warming is settled science then how come these reports get made obsolete and replaced?
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
|