Topical Editor Initial Decision: Reject (07 Nov 2017) by James Annan
Comments to the Author:
This
manuscript is silly and I'd be embarrassed to waste the time of
reputable scientists by sending it out for review. The trivial error of
the author is the assumption that the ~4W/m^2 error in cloud forcing is
compounded on an annual basis. Nowhere in the manuscript it is explained
why the annual time scale is used as opposed to hourly, daily or
centennially, which would make a huge difference to the results. The
~4W/m^2 error is in fact essentially time-invariant and thus if one is
determined to pursue this approach, the correct time scale is actually
infinite. Of course this is what underpins the use of anomalies for
estimating change, versus using the absolute temperatures. I am
confident that the author has already had this pointed out to them on
numerous occasions (see refs below) and repeating this process in GMD
will serve no useful purpose.
| | Topical Editor found (07 Nov 2017) James Annan agreed to serve as Topical Editor | | Topical Editor Call First Choice (07 Nov 2017) | | Uploaded Files validated (07 Nov 2017) by Anna Wenzel | | iThenticate.com Similarity Report completed (07 Nov 2017) similarities negligible / not found | | File Upload (07 Nov 2017) by Anna Wenzel Manuscript | | File Upload (05 Nov 2017) by Patrick Frank Abstract Manuscript (deleted) Supplement | Registered (05 Nov 2017)
| Cover Letter (Information for the Topical Editor): 5 November 2017
Prof. J. Hargreaves
BlueSkiesResearch.org.uk
The Old Chapel, Albert Hill
Albert Hill
SETTLE BD24 9HE
United Kingdom
Dear Prof. Hargreaves,
Please find the manuscript, “Propagation of Error and the Reliability of
Global Air Temperature Projections,” for submission to Geoscientific
Model Development.
This study analyzes GCM physical error. It does not concern climate
modeling as such or the physics of climate. The first propagation of
error through GCM global surface air temperature projections is
reported.
Propagation of error is standard in science to evaluate the predictive
reliability of a physical model. However, until now, GCMs have never
been so evaluated. The fundamental distinction of accuracy from
precision is central to this understanding.
New critical results include the following demonstrations:
1. That GCM global surface air temperature projections are linear extrapolations of greenhouse gas forcing.
2. That error in simulated global cloud cover is highly pair-wise
correlated among CMIP5 GCMs, implying a common systematic theory-bias.
3. That average annual CMIP5 long-wave cloud forcing (LWCF) error is
±114 times larger than the average annual 0.035 Wm-2 increase in CO2
forcing.
4. That GCM linearity means that systematic LWCF error propagates through air temperature projections as the root-sum-square.
5. That propagated LWCF error produces a centennial uncertainty of ±15 C in global averaged surface air temperature projections.
While the error analysis is very straightforward, these results are
clearly controversial. Therefore the Supplementary Material provides
extensive confirmatory data and analysis.
The conclusion is that even CMIP5 climate models are unable to resolve
the impact of greenhouse gases on global averaged surface air
temperature.
Unfortunately, it is necessary to draw to your attention the very clear
professional conflict of interest for any potential reviewer reliant on
climate models for research. The same caution applies to a reviewer
whose research is invested in the consensus position concerning the
climatological impact of CO2 emissions.
Therefore, it is requested that the choice of reviewers be among scientists who do not suffer such conflicts.
I do understand that this study presents a severe test of professional
integrity. Nevertheless I have confidence in your commitment to the full
rigor of science.
Expert reviewers might include:
Prof. Yong-Sang Choi, EW University, Seoul: ysc@ewha.ac.kr
Prof. Anastasios Tsonis, University of Wisconsin: aatsonis@uwm.edu
Prof. Roberto Rondanelli, U Chile: ronda@dgf.uchile.cl
Prof. Christopher Essex, University of Western Ontario: essex@uwo.ca
Prof. Victor Vasquez, University of Nevada, Reno, victor.vasquez@unr.edu.
Prof. Carl Wunsch, MIT, cwunsch@mit.edu
Although my professional affiliation is with SLAC National Accelerator
Laboratory, Stanford University, this work has been carried out on my
own time and was not funded by any external agency or third-party donor.
Finally, thank-you very much for your consideration, and I await your reply.
Yours sincerely,
Patrick Frank, Ph.D.
Palo Alto, CA
Cell: 650-477-4565
Email: pfrank830@earthlink.net | | Information about previous submission: | The
manuscript has been submitted to other journals. It has been rejected
on the grounds of reviews that have uniformly and fatally conflated
precision with accuracy.
The author's hope is that this lack of understanding is not uniform among climate scientists.
A document showing the universal unfamiliarity of these reviewers with physical error analysis can be supplied. |
| | Highlight paper suggestion: | The
interest of this paper falls under the EGU highlights on the grounds of
Timing, Significance, Implications and conflict, and Human or social
interest. |
|
| Suggested Referees: | | Yong-San Choi, ysc@ewha.ac.kr, EW University | | Christopher Essex, essex@uwo.ca, University of Western Ontario | | Roberto Rondanelli, ronda@dgf.uchile.cl, University of Chile | | Anastasios Tsonis, aatsonis@uwm.edu, University of Wisconsin | | Carl Wunsch, cwunsch@mit.edu, Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
|
|
| First Choice Index Terms: | Climate and Earth System Modeling
|
|
| | Second Choice Index Terms: | |
|
|
|
|
IF 3.458
CiteScore
SNIP 1.172
SJR 2.855
h5-index 38