[ad_1]
Those who persist in denying the reality of man-made climate change resorted to scraping the bottom of the barrel. Last week, the climate deniers of several blogs and media launched a new "document" supposed to "prove" that the vast majority of climatologists are wrong.
Except that, according to a scientific journal of the independent body of facts Climate Feedback, the document does nothing of the kind. The widely shared document, which claims to disrupt decades of scientific results, is not published in a peer-reviewed journal, but can be found on the pre-printed arXiv website.
As summarized by the expert of Climate Feedback, the insufficient PDF file is fraught with pitfalls and provides no source to the data it claims to examine.
After being covered by Russia Today and Sputnik News, the false claim has been subject to uncritical airtime at @Fox News Tucker Carlson and @SkyNewsAust Rowan Dean.
Given the journalists' commitment to accuracy, a correction is needed: https://t.co/cC0HskuwQF pic.twitter.com/Gphp1OJYCB– Back to climate (@ClimateFdbk) July 15, 2019
The manuscript states in an extraordinary way that human-caused climate change does not exist in practice. But scientists who have contributed to the scathing analysis of Climate Feedback point out that the cherry document selects information and relies on circular reasoning.
"This text may seem like a scientific article for a layman, but I would not accept it as a thesis," said Victor Venema, a climatologist at the University of Bonn, Germany, in the context of criticism of Climate Feedback.
"It does not cite its data sources, it does not discuss the uncertainties inherent in the data, nor the fact that other cloud data sets are discovering the opposite trend."
Rejecting a whole corpus of climatology, the six-page document cites only six references: four of them are those of the authors and two others, unpublished.
Mark Richardson, a physicist and research assistant at NASA and the University of California, further pointed out that the authors of this new study – one of which claims to be self-proclaimed, or the author of the climate – rely on unintended calculations "to show that only 0.1 ° C of warming comes from CO2, while 90% is caused by the oceans.
"This violates the conservation of the bulk of basic chemistry," he writes in Climate Feedback, "the oceans actually absorb CO2, which, again, is the exact opposite of what Kaupinen and Malmi claim. Without saying the opposite of reality, their conclusions can not be supported. "
Despite the myriad flaws in the manuscript, many media personalities whose climate change program had been implemented were just following along, regardless of independently checking the scientific facts or verifying the facts.
For example, Rowan Dean, a commentator for Sky News Australia's climate specialist, who belongs to Rupert Murdoch, must be noted, used this unfounded document to fuel his own verbal outburst.
"Climate change is a fraudulent and dangerous cult that paralyzed and bewitched the ruling elites and is driven by unscrupulous and sinister interests, including the power-hungry social crowd at the UN," m said Dean.
@rowandean a fact check could have helped you assess the strength of this unpublished 6-page pdf before jumping to conclusions https://t.co/QkZ8zg1B0M
– Back to climate (@ClimateFdbk) July 14, 2019
"The websites that have been promoting this article do not provide any counterpoint or fundamental factual check on the bold statements made by the authors," commented Stephen Po-Chedley, a scientist specializing in the atmosphere of the event. University of California.
Fortunately, climate specialists are not lacking to clear things up.
You can read the full summary and all expert feedback on Climate Feedback.
[ad_2]
Source link