home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.skeptic      Skeptics discussing pseudo-science      95,770 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 95,686 of 95,770   
   Dawn Flood to Paul Aubrin   
   Re: IT'S SO HOT THAT IT'S COLD!!!!!   
   14 Feb 26 20:20:29   
   
   XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.atheism   
   From: Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com   
      
   On 2/14/2026 9:52 AM, Paul Aubrin wrote:   
   > Le 14/02/2026 à 16:26, Dawn Flood a écrit :   
   >>> Data has no "null hypothesis". Your hypothesis is that each doubling   
   >>> of CO2 concentrations causes a temperature increase. So each annual   
   >>> increment of CO2 concentrations should cause a small but definite   
   >>> temperature increase. Thus, the dots in the plot between annual CO2   
   >>> increments and temperature increments should look like some cloud   
   >>> with a definite linear trend. It does not (R²~0.01).   
   >>>   
   >>> No (visible) correlation implies no (detectable) causation.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> No way!  No one thinks this way!!   
   >   
   > It's data, no hypothesis. Why can't you detect the temperature   
   > increments which should exist if logarithms of CO2 concentrations   
   > increments caused temperatures increments. The correlation, if it   
   > exists, is not detectable in annual data series.Show me the correlation   
   > between those two signals (log CO2 increments and temperature   
   > increments) and I will change my mind.   
   >   
   > CO2 increments follow ocean temperature increments.   
   > https://postimg.cc/JyPJbv6y   
   >   
   > Temperature annual increments have no detectable relation with annual   
   > fossil emissions.   
   >   
   > It's what data show, not an interpretation.   
   >   
      
   And, so, a person who weighs 500 lbs and consumes 5000 calories per day   
   is no different than a 150 lb person who consumes 1500 calories per   
   day??  Per your analysis, as long as caloric intake does not change,   
   such is orthogonal to an individual's weight?!   
      
   In addition, why in the world would you take logarithms??  Do you know   
   what a logarithm even is??  When one has two datasets (or more) that are   
   orders of magnitude different than each other, than logarithms begin to   
   make sense.  Otherwise, it becomes impossible to plot such datasets.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca