Findings in leading scientific journal that globe has breached key warming milestone challenged by climate science experts

Between 30 metres and 90 metres below the surface of the Caribbean Sea, an ancient sponge species that grows a hard skeleton has been quietly recording changes in the ocean temperature for hundreds of years.

Now those sponges are at the centre of a bold and controversial claim made in a leading scientific journal that, since the start of the Industrial Revolution, the planet may have already warmed by 1.7C – half a degree more than estimates used by the United Nation’s climate panel.

Several leading scientists urged caution, saying the research had “over-reached” and questioned whether such a bold claim could be made based on one sponge species from a single location.

But Prof Malcolm McCulloch of the University of Western Australia, who led the research published in the journal Nature Climate Change, said the results were robust.

  • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    5 months ago

    That is absolutely antithetical to the scientific process. Nothing is considered ‘fact’ until rigorously proven. This is interesting evidence that absolutely warrants criticism.

    • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yea, why is it “one scientist said so despite their claim disputing the current standard! Fact now”. This paper needs independent verification and follow up studies to confirm they didn’t just massively fuck up their numbers or something else

      • theodewere@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        you’ve obviously never read a scientific paper… if you understood anything about science, you would see that this method of determining sea temperature changes produces a dataset that is much more reliable than the data we have been referring to…

          • theodewere@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            5 months ago

            that’s exactly how science comes into existence… one study and paper at a time… whoever taught you otherwise was lying or stupid…

            • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              5 months ago

              No is arguing otherwise.

              One paper does not make a “fact”. Years of established research and widespread consensus barely justifies labeling a subject as a “fact”.

              Have you already forgotten the room temperature superconductor claims from last year?

              Let me be absolutely clear. I am in no way trying to discredit this paper. I see no reason to question their findings, it’s good science and absolutely should be followed up on. However, I take strong exception to people jumping on any half decent study and treating it as gospel.

    • theodewere@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      5 months ago

      the scientific process is demonstrated in their paper… if you can find fault in their methods, then there is controversy, otherwise their findings are fact… “criticism” in science is done with research, not comments on the internet or to news outlets…

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        The scientific process requires repetition, ie “rigorous proving”. One paper =\= “fact”, even if no obvious fault can be found in the surface. And to be clear, the lack of repetition doesn’t mean they’re wrong, just that there’s more to be done.

          • BreadOven@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            5 months ago

            We did it. We found the clearly non-scientist. I wouldn’t claim a certainty 100 % on the papers I’ve published myself. There’s always new research and one paper could only be looking at one very specific thing.

            But overall: there is a climate crisis, there is no doubting that.

            • hauiA
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              We‘re checking the idea of detecting llm usage on lemmy since the number of trolls seems to be steadily increasing. In case anyone with coding/dev experience is interested, lmk.

              • theodewere@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                you go ahead and do your checking, little fella… be sure and let me know what your code has to say…

            • theodewere@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              i didn’t say you were naturally stupid, just that you are using a stupid argument… it’s just a fact… if you don’t want me to point out the stupidity of your arguments, you shouldn’t use stupid argumentation…

              maybe you’re a little defensive because you’re full of shit