Replany paper withdrawn by editors of Nature in response to Nic Lewis critique

[stadiumwave]

 

[donsutherland1]

56 minutes ago, stadiumwave said:

 

The retraction note can be found here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1585-5

Review is helpful. Occasionally, errors are made and they require papers to be retracted. Even with this paper's retraction, the fundamental understandings related to climate change and the increase in oceanic heat content have not changed.

[bdgwx]

Can the authors resubmit with corrections?

[ORH_wxman]

2 hours ago, bdgwx said:

Can the authors resubmit with corrections?

I'm sure they can....but the big part of the paper was how much the magnitude changed in OHC and with relatively high certainty. With the corrections, their uncertainty goes through the roof, so it gives far less confidence in such a value which was larger than previous estimates....part of the reason the paper was a big deal a the time.

[chubbs]

 

19 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

The retraction note can be found here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1585-5

Review is helpful. Occasionally, errors are made and they require papers to be retracted. Even with this paper's retraction, the fundamental understandings related to climate change and the increase in oceanic heat content have not changed.

Yes, the recent observations (Argo floats and other buoy systems) and climate models are in good agreement.

[stadiumwave]

23 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

I'm sure they can....but the big part of the paper was how much the magnitude changed in OHC and with relatively high certainty. With the corrections, their uncertainty goes through the roof, so it gives far less confidence in such a value which was larger than previous estimates....part of the reason the paper was a big deal a the time.

 

Just a reminder we have to remain humble.