XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.democrats   
   From: shut.up@once.invalid   
      
   Paul Aubrin  wrote:   
   > Le 06/09/2025 à 21:59, Trevor a écrit :   
   > > Certainly can. I told you how they can be compared, and you snipped it.   
   > >   
   > > Your denialism is rooted in ideology, not science.   
   >   
   > "let us simply observe that they may be compared" is a circular   
   > argument. That is no argument at all.   
      
      
   You're right! It's not an argument, it's a conclusion drawn from the   
   argument I already presented, which you snipped without comment.   
      
      
   >  What you can clearly observe is   
   > that peaks and change rates of a signal with a high sampling rate cannot   
   > be compared with a signal with a low sampling rate. They should never be   
   > compared.   
      
      
   That's like claiming you can't compare the minute-to-minute level of the   
   S&P500 to a day-to-day price of one stock. The comparison is legit, and   
   it's easy to see if you calibrate your measuring stick. Different   
   sampling intervals of different metrics, but the correlation is there   
   waiting to be seen.   
      
   Your real concern is having to rethink your climate denial.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)