Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 17h

Thanks for your interest and I'm glad you liked this part. I'm certainly no expert on these instrument uncertainties, but for our purposes they ended up being negligible relative to the scales of interest (i.e., model bias and inter-model spread in sea ice extent).

Reposted by Linus Vogt

Thomas Frölicher @froeltho.bsky.social · 6d

By linking Antarctic sea ice, cloud cover, deep ocean temperatures, and global warming, our new study led by @linusvogt.bsky.social finds that ocean heat uptake and thermal sea level rise by 2100 could be 3–14% higher, and global surface warming 3–7% greater than previously thought👇

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 7d

🚨🌊 New highlight paper out today in Earth System Dynamics!

We find an observational constraint implying more future global ocean heat uptake, cloud feedback, and warming than the CMIP6 mean.

This contrasts with previous estimates based on past warming trends.

🔗 esd.copernicus.org/articles/16/...

Increased future ocean heat uptake constrained by Antarctic sea ice extent

Abstract. The ocean takes up over 90 % of the excess heat stored in the Earth system as a result of anthropogenic climate change, which has led to sea level rise and an intensification of marine extre...

esd.copernicus.org

6 14

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 6d

That sounds really interesting, let me know when there is a preprint!

Funnily enough, using HadISST in our study would also have led to an exaggerated "conservative" estimate of high warming, since then the models would underestimate Antarctic SIE even more. But fortunately we are not sailors.

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 6d

Thanks for the clarification!

1

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 7d

Special thanks to @polarocean.bsky.social who had the initial idea for this project, and to all coauthors: @jbsallee.bsky.social, Casimir de Lavergne, @froeltho.bsky.social, and Lester Kwiatkowski.

4

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 7d

📈 As CMIP6 models underestimate historical Antarctic sea ice extent on average, this leads to an upward correction of climate projections by 2100 under all considered scenarios:

- OHU +3–14%
- Cloud feedback +19–32%
- Global surface warming +6–7%

Two box plots showing the distribution of future global heat uptake with and without an observational constraint. The constrained estimate is larger and less uncertain than the prior.

1 5

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 7d

Thus, the state of Antarctic sea ice today quantifies the potential for global climate change in the future.

More sea ice now → more warming later

This is evident as a strong correlation across CMIP6 models (and it also holds in CMIP5)

A scatter plot showing the relationship between historical Antarctic sea ice extent (x-axis) and future ocean heat uptake (y-axis) across an ensemble of 28 climate models. There is a positive correlation of r=0.87. Also indicated is the observed value of Antarctic sea ice extent, showing that models tend to underestimate it.

1 4

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 7d

The constraint is based on Antarctic sea ice extent 🧊

Models with more sea ice today also simulate colder Southern Ocean SSTs, a colder deep ocean, and more mid-latitude cloud cover.

In the future, these models lose more sea ice and clouds, amplifying SW cloud feedback, surface warming, and OHU.

Part of a schematic from a paper showing a transition from an initial climate state to a future climate state under 21st century climate change. In climate models with a cold initial state, the transition is larger than in models with a mild initial state. The "coldness" of the initial state is quantified using Antarctic sea ice extent.

1 4

Linus Vogt @linusvogt.bsky.social · 7d

🚨🌊 New highlight paper out today in Earth System Dynamics!

We find an observational constraint implying more future global ocean heat uptake, cloud feedback, and warming than the CMIP6 mean.

This contrasts with previous estimates based on past warming trends.

🔗 esd.copernicus.org/articles/16/...

Increased future ocean heat uptake constrained by Antarctic sea ice extent

Abstract. The ocean takes up over 90 % of the excess heat stored in the Earth system as a result of anthropogenic climate change, which has led to sea level rise and an intensification of marine extre...

esd.copernicus.org

3 9 30

Reposted by Linus Vogt

Bob Kopp @bobkopp.net · Sep 5

I had an engagement with blogger, failed California gubernatorial candidate, and self-identified reporter Michael Shellenberger this past week, which started out being about this new paper being heralded by climate skeptics as disproving global sea-level acceleration. (LONG 🧵)

5 67 180

Reposted by Linus Vogt

Clara Burgard @climateclara.bsky.social · Jul 23

🌊
Looking for a #postdoc to join us at @ipsl.bsky.social within the #ANR project #AIAI (AI to improve coupling between the Antarctic 🧊 and the 🌊/🌧️), a collaboration between @igegrenoble.bsky.social , @lsce-ipsl.bsky.social and #LOCEAN!
Deadline: Aug 8th
Apply here: emploi.cnrs.fr/Offres/CDD/U...

Portail Emploi CNRS - Offre d'emploi - Postdoctoral researcher in polar climate modeling (M/F)

emploi.cnrs.fr

2 5 7

Reposted by Linus Vogt

Jan Zika @janzika.bsky.social · Jul 23

Paper just out in AI4Earth led by the incredible @eveapiedagnel.bsky.social. We show how to exploit the ocean’s tight T-S relationship at constant pressure to map trends in salinity from sparse data doi.org/10.1175/AIES.... GMM works well because the relationships are so linear, but why are they?

doi.org

1 5

Reposted by Linus Vogt

Carl T. Bergstrom @carlbergstrom.com · Jul 16

1. Kevin Gross and I just posted a new science-of-science preprint.

This one explores the looming peer review crisis. As many of you know, it's becoming significantly more difficult for journal editors to find scholars willing to serve as peer reviewers for submitted manuscripts.

Will anyone review this paper? Screening, sorting, and the feedback cycles that imperil peer review

Scholarly publishing relies on peer review to identify the best science. Yet finding willing and qualified reviewers to evaluate manuscripts has become an increasingly challenging task, possibly even ...

arxiv.org

23 220 550

Reposted by Linus Vogt

Alisa Bokulich @alisabokulich.bsky.social · Jul 1

⏰ Free access to read & download thru August 20 the final published version of Wendy Parker & my paper "Understanding Data Uncertainty" at this link ⬇️
authors.elsevier.com/c/1lMUI8yuR6...

#philsci #metasci 🧪 ⚒️

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/shpsa
Understanding data uncertainty
Alisa Bokulich", Wendy S. Parker b,"
" Department of Philosophy, Boston University, United States
› Department of Philosophy, Virginia Tech, United States
ABSTRACT
Scientific data without uncertainty estimates are increasingly seen as incomplete. Recent discussions in the philosophy of data, however, have given little attention to the nature of uncertainty estimation. We begin to redress this gap by, first, discussing the concepts and practices of uncertainty estimation in metrology and showing how they can be adapted for scientific data more broadly; and second, advancing five philosophical theses about uncertainty estimates for data: they are substantive
adequacy-for-purpose view of uncertainty estimation, addresses a weakness in a recent philosophical account of data, and provides a new perspective on the "safety" versus "precision" debate in metrology.
1. Introduction
Uncertainty is an inescapable part of science. Yet while much has been written in recent years on uncertainty in computational modeling contexts (especially related to climate modeling; see, e.g., Parker, 2010;
Frigg, Thompson, & Werndl, 2015; Knutti et al., 2019), comparatively little philosophical attention has been given to uncertainty associated with scientific data collected via observation, measurement, and experiment. Important preliminary work on this topic examines the evaluation of systematic uncertainty in measurement (Staley, 2020), changing conceptions of uncertainty in metrology (de Courtenay & Grégis, 2017; Grégis, 2019b), and the representation of uncertainty when measurements are discordant (Grégis, 2019a). Overall, however, when it comes to uncertainty associated with scientific data obtained via observation, measurement, and experiment—what we will call "data uncertainty"-the territory remains largely unexplored from a philosophical point of view.
Conception…

1 24 82

Reposted by Linus Vogt

Paridhi Rustogi @paridhirustogi.bsky.social · Jun 25

Do bubbles matter for ocean carbon uptake? 🌊🫧
Yes, especially for local CO2 fluxes, where wave breaking can enhance variability by up to 40%. That’s an important consideration for #mCDR, where fluxes could otherwise be miscalculated. More in our paper here: [https://doi.org/10.1029/2024GB008382]

Influence of Wave‐Induced Variability on Ocean Carbon Uptake

Wave effects introduce high-frequency variability and amplify the air-sea CO2 flux seasonality, with the largest impacts during storms Wave effects enhance carbon storage and amplify hemispheric ...

agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com

1 6 27