tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post3471503275127432943..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: Bob Tisdale's latest conspiracy theory about ocean heatSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-34327004617529508482016-07-21T22:58:14.548+10:002016-07-21T22:58:14.548+10:00The SkS article was a repost from The Guardian. Th...The SkS article was a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/jul/01/the-war-on-science-with-change-how-you-see-the-world" rel="nofollow">repost from The Guardian</a>. The <a href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/team.php" rel="nofollow">SkS team is listed here</a>. John Abraham isn't part of the Skeptical Science team.<br /><br />>>"<i>good luck with the rest of your hatchet attack on Tisdale...</i>"<br /><br />If there is anything you disagree with in the article, feel free to tell us what, why, and back it up with science. (I see a certain irony in your mentioning the War on Science. Just guessing, but are you one of the anti-science advocates that Shawn Otto writes about?)Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-89701450530420259432016-07-21T01:30:12.098+10:002016-07-21T01:30:12.098+10:00July 1, 2016, The War on Science.... by John Abra... July 1, 2016, The War on Science.... by John Abraham, published in Skeptikal Science dot com, kind of makes Abraham "of SKS" but good luck with the rest of your hatchet attack on Tisdale..... hollow boneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01998012866458982987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-88283233815453618682015-07-27T12:35:10.529+10:002015-07-27T12:35:10.529+10:00"that ratio doesn't change if the units c..."that ratio doesn't change if the units change" - you're right of course Alexander. I wasn't thinking.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-2031598756309177422015-07-27T12:21:27.218+10:002015-07-27T12:21:27.218+10:00I haven't checked, but AFAIK presenting their ...I haven't checked, but AFAIK presenting their main result with "NOCD-mapping" result was solely to show how the choice of mapping made a difference to the result, so they used the same data throughout. <br /><br />NODC may well use a (slightly) different set of base data, different QC, different gridding etc so this result and NODC would not be expected to be identical.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-20972475141905528342015-07-27T12:01:17.629+10:002015-07-27T12:01:17.629+10:00To just lay on comment after comment: it should be...To just lay on comment after comment: it should be clear to anyone graphing the publicly available OHTemp data from NODC:<br />https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/basin_avt_data.html<br /><br />that what is available there (and what Tisdale used) is not what Cheng et al. made with the "NODC-mapping". I'm not sure exactly what that is, but either way the two series are visually very different from each other. You'd think Tisdale might want to ask for clarification on the differences between the NODC-mapping used by Cheng et al., and whatever was used for the publicly available data. As in: does "NODC-mapping" actually mean the exact method as used for the publicly available data, or no? Are the authors using an updated method that hasn't made its way into the publicly available data? Is the public data more updated?<br /><br />It would seem to me to not be useful to yet compare those trends.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02320395147911342848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-29430214930896858252015-07-27T11:45:01.302+10:002015-07-27T11:45:01.302+10:00Maybe "power spectrum" would be a better...Maybe "power spectrum" would be a better term here. The power given in a periodogram for those periods is amplified.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02320395147911342848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-55057029164752089062015-07-27T11:41:27.397+10:002015-07-27T11:41:27.397+10:00What I find interesting from their paper is that t...What I find interesting from their paper is that they say, with respect to Figure 2, that there is multi-decadal variation in ocean heat content rate judging from the changes in the 9-year rate. But that is almost certainly due to their choice of filter; when you take moving derivatives you change the frequency spectrum for the new data. The derivative series amplifies certain frequencies and dampens others as a bandpass filter. As it were, this choice of filter amplifies periods from 7.8 years to 41.7 years, with a peak at 13 years. So it's not much a wonder why that variation—a roughly 15 year cycle—exists in the 9-year data.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02320395147911342848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-72332292671161505932015-07-27T11:03:42.478+10:002015-07-27T11:03:42.478+10:00"I don't know where Bob got his "dou..."I don't know where Bob got his "doubled" from."<br /><br />He's roughly dividing 0.0061 by 0.0033; that ratio doesn't change if the units change. However, he should also probably know that the trend in the paper is from 1970 to 2014, and the trend he calculated was until 2005. The NODC 0-700m temperature trend over the period until 2014 is 0.003929, so the difference between that and the Cheng et al. value is an increase of about 55%, not 100% as he suggests.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02320395147911342848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-26374973577280338302015-07-27T07:54:41.771+10:002015-07-27T07:54:41.771+10:00Well done. Looking at WUWT gives one mixed feeling...Well done. Looking at WUWT gives one mixed feelings of schadenfreude and fall on floor laughing at the stupidity.Dan Satterfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17103428750040230969noreply@blogger.com