New Study: 1900-2010 Global Warming So Uncertain Any Rate Or Magnitude Conclusion ‘Impossible’

“The compilation of land- and sea-surface [thermometer] uncertainty yield a 1900-2010 global air-temperature record anomaly of 0.86 ± 1.92°C (2 σ), which renders impossible any conclusion regarding the rate or magnitude of climate warming since 1850 or earlier.” – Dr. Patrick Frank (2023)

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

The built-in ± 1.92°C “range of ignorance” 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.

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°C per century from 1971-2000, but 0.0°C per century during 1981-2010, and 1.23°C per century from 1911-1940.

“For 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, 2σ = ±0.4°C and engine-intake SSTs 2σ  = ±2°C…”

“Each of the engine-intake calibrations yielded a bias and uncertainty of 0.3 ±1.2°C (1σ), which obviates accuracy.”

“The magnitude of the SST error mean itself remains unknown.”

“The 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.”

Image Source: Frank, 2023
Image Source: Frank, 2023

3 responses to “New Study: 1900-2010 Global Warming So Uncertain Any Rate Or Magnitude Conclusion ‘Impossible’”

  1. Yonason

    Oh, yes. I recognize some of this subject matter.

    As some of you may know, I never tire of posting this about the temperature anomalies, which for some reason the alarmists always refer to as temperatures.

    A deeper look…

    People need to be constantly reminded of what alarmists get wrong, as long as they keep getting it wrong, especially when it is deliberate.

  2. DMA

    So the measurements are not good enough to conclude that the warming is real and the models are not good enough to provide any prediction. Thank you Dr. Frank for your tough but thorough analyses. May the Bidens and Kerrys of this world heed this science before they destroy our economies trying to stop what we have not yet measured.

  3. Luke

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy