by "V-for-Vendicar" <Justice@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
May 12, 2008 at 01:35 AM
Here are the global average temperatures over the last decade. "o" = trend
line.
==
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 *****************************
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
And the rate of increase is about 2'C per century.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMu14mBXAs
"zdzis1" <zdzis1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> Residual standard error: 0.09039 on 8 degrees of freedom
> Multiple R-Squared: 0.293, Adjusted R-squared: 0.2047
> F-statistic: 3.316 on 1 and 8 DF, p-value: 0.1061
>
> which means that there is no evidence for linear trend
Ahahahaha... You can argue that in <YOUR OPINION> there is no
statistical
evidence for a linear trend.
But then you have computed that the probability that the slope is
positive
at 94.7%.
"zdzis1" <zdzis1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> 1) probability that the slope is negative: 0.053
> 2) probability that the slope is positive: 0.947
So those KKKonesrvative Denialists who claim that the earth is cooling
are
94.7 percent LIARS...
Now how many years of earlier data do you need to conclude that they are
99.99% liars?
4 earlier years? 5?
"zdzis1" <zdzis1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> lining up << all those "o"'s >> does not mean anything
Clearly it does.