On Apr 7, 8:08=A0pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
<Just...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > 1998 14.57 **************************0
> > 1999 14.33 *****************0
> > 2000 14.33 *****************0
> > 2001 14.48 ************************0
> > 2002 14.56 ***************************0
> > 2003 14.55 ***************************0
> > 2004 14.49 *************************0
> > 2005 14.63 *******************************0
> > 2006 14.54 ***************************0
> > 2007 14,57 *****************************0
>
> I see that you have dishonestly altered the plot yet again.
It's your data you dip****.
>
> Here is the original.
>
> > No problem. Here are the figures for the last decade.
>
> > 1998 14.57 *********************o*****
> > 1999 14.33 *****************>>>>o
> > 2000 14.33 *****************>>>>>o
> > 2001 14.48 ************************o
> > 2002 14.56 *************************o**
> > 2003 14.55 **************************o*
> > 2004 14.49 *************************>>o
> > 2005 14.63 *****************************o**
> > 2006 14.54 ***************************>>>o
> > 2007 14.57 *****************************
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > Nothing at all.
>
> =A0 Just a warming of roughly 2'C per century...
Crap.
>
> =A0 MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > =A0Hardly anything in nature can follow a linear relation****p
>
> A statement that illustrates your profound ignorance.
>
> In reality over a sufficiently chosen time frame, everything in nature
> follows a linear relation****p.
It does not. Not in any sense. Over a chosen t-series one can make
a simplistic regression model to 'prove' anything you wish. Doesn't
make it real however.
>
> I don't think your KKKonservative Liedeology has managed to disproved
> Calculus.
The Calculus is not involved in this analysis.
>
> =A0MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNN
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > and that data my boy, is as close to a flat line that you can get.
>
> =A0 It shows a increase of approximately 2'C per century. =A0(Standard
Lin=
erar
> Regresssion)
Nope. Just plain wrong.
>
> =A0 MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOONNNNNNNN
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > Here are the figures for the years 2002 -2004
> > 2002 14.56 =A0***************************0
> > 2003 14.55 =A0***************************0
> > 2004 14.49 =A0*************************0
> > Care to plot a line?
>
> =A0 I could, but the correlation coefficient would be too small for it
to =
be
> meaningful.
Sook. Why not? Is the interval not to your liking!?
>
> =A0 MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > Here are the figures for the years 2005 - 2007
> > > 2005 14.63 =A0*******************************0
> > > 2006 14.54 =A0***************************0
> > > 2007 14,57 =A0*****************************0
> > Care to plot a line?
>
> =A0 I could, but the correlation coefficient would be too small for it
to =
be
> meaningful.
> =A0 MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN
Doesn't look very 'warm' does it?
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > Here are the figures for the years 1998 - 2000
> >> 1998 14.57 =A0**************************0
> >> 1999 14.33 =A0*****************0
> >> 2000 14.33 =A0*****************0
> > Care to plot a line?
>
> =A0 I could, but the correlation coefficient would be too small for it
to =
be
> meaningful.
> =A0 MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN
Brrrr...... Chilly in fact.......
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > Using a simplistic linear regression on an incomplete
> > set of data is meaningless.
>
> =A0Since it is a time series, and time is infinite,
It is not. However, I rather doubt you are up to that
pertikuler lesson.
> the set will never be
> complete. =A0Hence by your AHAHAHAHAHA "logic" performing a regression
on =
a
> time series is always meaningless.
It is. Start from 3,000,000 BST and let's see how the line looks.
>
> =A0 MMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > =A0It might suck in the great unwashed, but fools no-one with any
level =
of
> > statistical
> > ability.
>
> =A0 So you have been utterly fooled then.
No. I have rather a gifted ability with statistics. I see shapes
in numbers. It's rather odd, but it makes me a good
guesser.
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > The sample I just provided from your data, in three sets
> > of three observations, tells a different story than the one
> > you wish to promote. =A0Doesn't it?
>
> =A0 Nope. =A0Since the three subsets are statistically insignificant.
>
> =A0 MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNN
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > You should concentrate on fini****ng high school.
>
> =A0 Been there, done that, got the t-****rt. =A0Then went on to quantum
> mechanics.
Really? An actual Physicist posting?
I'm impressed. Why is your Math so woefull?
>
> =A0 MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN
>
> > 2007 is the second warmest year in history. 2005 the warmest.
>
> "Addinall" <addin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > Crap. =A0Pure and simple bull****.
>
> 2007 Tied for Earth's Second Warmest Year Andrea Thompson
> LiveScience Staff Writer
Is she a scientist as well?
>
> January 16, 2008
>
> The year 2007 has tied 1998 for the Earth's second warmest this century,
> NASA
> scientists announced today.
>
> Climatologists at the agency's Goddard Institute for Space Sciences
(GISS)=
> in
> New York used temperature data from weather stations on land, satellite
> measurements of sea ice temperature since 1982 and data from ****ps for
> earlier
> years to construct a record of global average temperatures going back
for
> over a
> century.
>
> The GISS analysis has 1934, 1998 and 2005 tied as the warmest years in
the=
> United States (with 2005 being the warmest globally).
>
> The eight warmest years globally in the past century have all occurred
sin=
ce
> 1998, and the 14 warmest years have all occurred since 1990.
>
> The greatest observed warming in 2007 occurred in the Arctic, which
> experienced
> a record sea ice melt this summer, opening up the fabled Northwest
Passage=
> for
> the first time.
And it just iced over again. What a pity. Any explanations from
the quant camp?
>
> "As we predicted last year, 2007 was warmer than 2006, continuing the
stro=
ng
> warming trend of the past 30 years that has been confidently attributed
to=
> the
> effect of increasing human-made greenhouse gases," said NASA GISS
Director=
> James
> E. Hansen.
>
> A minor flaw in the GISS record discovered last year did not affect this
> analysis, the scientists noted.
>
> Hansen says that warming can be expected to continue, with another
record
> warm
> year coming soon, though it is unlikely to be 2008.
>
> "Barring a large volcanic eruption, a record global temperature clearly
> exceeding that of 2005 can be expected within the next few years, at the
> time of
> the next El Nino , because of the background warming trend attributable
to=
> continuing increases of greenhouse gases," Hansen said.
>
> El Nino tends to have a warming effect on temperatures in many areas,
whil=
e
> the
> volcanic ash that an eruption spews into the air has a cooling effect.
>
> While most scientists agree the planet is warming, the trend does not
> proceed
> constantly upward year-by-year. Other factors cause hikes and dips in
the
> generally trajectory of the global temperature chart, which has been
mostl=
y
> trending upward since the beginning of the 20th century.
Complete and utter nonsense.
Mark Addinall.
|
