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.

  • theodewere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    until someone finds a reason why this method might be unreliable, it isn’t controversial… it’s a scientific fact with implications…

    • 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
        cake
        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.

              • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
                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

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Hey, have you noticed how everyone is saying you’re wrong and nobody is upvoting your replies? Maybe take a moment to reflect on why that might be.

      • theodewere@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        there are a lot of trolls, and they like to congregate… they hope that by bullying someone they can make bad facts disappear…

        but it’s pretty obvious none of them have even made a serious trip to a university library

        these new numbers clearly are now the best estimate we have

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

          You really need to calm down and reflect.

          I have a PhD and a dozen of published and recognized papers.

          You are misusing the term “fact”. Just because you think something is fact, does not make it so.

        • set_secret@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          lol so funny people can’t read a paper and reactively downvote anyone who contradicts what they feel reality should be. You’re correct until we find a way to disprove this (eg somebody repeats it and finds it flawed) obviously robust study we need treat it as fact.

    • UNWILLING_PARTICIPANT@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      To anyone reading this comment thinking it makes a kind of sense on the surface (I’m no scientist) - keep reading. This comment is clearly meant to be just a bit of shit stirring

    • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Different parts of the world are warming at different rates. So while it might be true that a part of the Caribbean warmed by 1.7 degrees, that doesn’t tell us much about the Earth as a whole.