6. Gaps between sparse data of different types taken at ill-
assorted points far from one another in space and Gme must
be filled in by mulG-parameter models constructed from other
data and physics-based calculaGons.
The results depend on the accuracy and completeness of the
measurements, the realism and precision of the models, and
the rigor of the staGsGcal techniques used to merge data and
models.
Progress is recursive. Improvements in observaGons,
theoreGcal understanding, models, staGsGcal techniques, and
computaGonal capacity produce new results that, treated as
data in subsequent models, start the cycle of reanalysis again.
Reanalysis
10. The oceans take up more than 90% of the energy
added to the climate system by humans. The
atmosphere, 2%.
The heat content of the ocean is our best
measure of humanity’s impact on the climate. Its
Gme history and geographical distribuGon help us
understand whether the changes we are seeing
are incidental or fundamental. It tells us how
much climate risk we are storing up for the
future. Fortunately, we can now measure it.
Why do we let the world rely
on temperature?
14. Global surface temperature is the benchmark
that all climate models are tuned to. Would their
performance improve if they were constrained to
opGmize the way they jointly saGsfy temperature
and ocean heat content constraints? Would the
models beRer separate anthropogenic warming
from “natural variaGons”? Would decision
makers have looked at both temperature and
ocean heat content if the modelers had done so?
What if OHC had also been a benchmark
for climate modeling?
15. That an important policy debate has been hostage to delicate
aspects of reanalysis shows how tricky reliance on a single
indicator can be. Had ocean heat content been as visible as
global temperature, it would have made clear to all that
humans were sGll adding energy to the climate system. Climate
change was not slowing down, only global surface warming
was.
Of course, ocean heat content data, indeed all climate Gme
series, are fragile in the same way as temperature has proven
to be. But that is the point. When all indicators are fragile, you
should not rely on one; you risk over-focusing policy on it. You
look at a number of different ones and ask whether they all
point in the same general direcGon. You look at the balance of
evidence.
This whole episode is troubling
26. Is it possible to use the tools at hand-
observaGons from space and ground
networks; demographic, economic and
societal measures; big data staGsGcal
techniques; numerical models, and
modern communicaGons-to produce global
conGnuous awareness of the nature and
evolving risks of climate change?
Global ConGnuous Awareness
27. My dear lady, here at UCLA they first
interconnected computers. Soon
there will be a world-wide network. It
will first be used to manage global
finance, but the expansion of
economic acGvity it induces will
create so much polluGon that it will
be asked to manage our economy and
environment in harmony with one
another. People will want day-by-
day, minute-by-minute adapGve
management, for which they neither
have the paGence or quickness of
mind. So they will connect their
environmental sensors directly to
their computer network. At that
point, they will have created a planet
aware of its own internal processes, a
planetary consciousness. And that,
dear lady, is what will communicate
with similar enGGes across the galaxy.
Dinner table conversaGon in the 1970s,
paraphrased by Charles Kennel in 2016
