\documentclass[10pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{CJKutf8} 
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}





\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage{natbib}




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[english]{babel}



\usepackage{float}








\begin{document}
\begin{CJK}{UTF8}{gbsn}

\title{Science AMA Series: We just published a paper showing recent ocean
warming had been underestimated, and that NOAA (and not Congress) got
this right. Ask Us Anything!}



\author[1]{ocean_warming_AMA }%
\author[1]{r/Science AMAs}%
\affil[1]{Affiliation not available}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{April 24, 2026}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup





\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{abstract}
Hello there /r/Science! We are a group of researchers who just published
a new open access paper in Science Advances showing that ocean warming
was indeed being underestimated, confirming the conclusion of a paper
last year that triggered a series of political attacks. You can find
some press coverage of our work at Scientific American, the Washington
Post, and the CBC. One of the authors, Kevin Cowtan, has an explainer on
his website as well as links to the code and data used in the paper. For
backstory, in 2015 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) updated its global temperature dataset, showing that their
previous data had been underestimating the amount of recent warming
we've had. The change was mainly from their updated ocean data (i.e.
their sea surface temperature or ``SST'') product. The NOAA group's
updated estimate of warming formed the basis of high profile paper in
Science (Karl et al. 2015), which joined a growing chorus of papers (see
also Cowtan and Way, 2014; Cahill et al. 2015; Foster and Rahmstorf
2016) pushing back on the idea that there had been a ``pause'' in
warming. This led to Lamar Smith (R-TX), the Republican chair of the
House Science, Space, and Technology Committee to accuse NOAA of
deliberately ``altering data'' for nefarious ends, and issue a series of
public attacks and subpoenas for internal communications that were
characterized as ``fishing expeditions'', ``waging war'', and a ``witch
hunt''. Rather than subpoenaing people's emails, we thought we would
check to see if the Karl et al. adjustments were kosher a different way-
by doing some science! We knew that a big issue with SST products had to
do with the transition from mostly ship-based measurements to mostly
buoy-based measurements. Not accounting for this transition properly
could hypothetically impart a cool bias, i.e. cause an underestimate in
the amount of warming over recent decades. So we looked at three
``instrumentally homogeneous'' records (which wouldn't see a bias due to
changeover in instrumentation type, because they're from one kind of
instrument): only buoys, satellite radiometers, and Argo floats. We
compared these to the major SST data products, including the older
(ERSSTv3b) and newer (ERSSTv4) NOAA records as well as the HadSST3 (UK's
Hadley Centre) and COBE-SST (Japan's JMA) records. We found that the
older NOAA SST product was indeed underestimating the rate of recent
warming, and that the newer NOAA record appeared to correctly account
for the ship/buoy transition- i.e. the NOAA correction seems like it was
a good idea! We also found that the HadSST3 and COBE-SST records appear
to underestimate the amount of warming we've actually seen in recent
years. Ask us anything about our work, or climate change generally!
Joining you today will be: Zeke Hausfather (@hausfath) Kevin Cowtan Dave
Clarke Peter Jacobs (/u/past\_is\_future) Mark Richardson (if time
permits) Robert Rohde (if time permits)%
\end{abstract}%



\sloppy




\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{CJK}\end{document}

