Climate Research

[VectraMan]

Maybe, but how many years is the tip of the hockey stick that caused the whole debate? Statistically not a lot longer in the grand scheme of things. It's like sacking a manager after 5 games.

WHS. The number of years being dismissed as "insignificant" isn't all that far off the number of years that show an "indisputable" trend. But I never did statistics at school.

[doodab]

To be significant requires that there is a strong probability (usually 95%) the new readings are due to a change in the underlying distribution and not just random variation. This is usually worked out by calculating the probability of getting those readings assuming that a "null hypotheses" (in this case a warming globe I would assume) is true.

It's not possible to say whether X more readings would be significant or not, as it depends on the values as well.

I studied maths to degree level and I know enough to know with absolute certainty that I can't tell who is right without a lot of work, if at all, and I simply don't have the time or inclination. I am dealing with the uncertainty by living on top of a hill, making sure my wardrobe is well stocked with suitable clothes for any climate, and not giving too much of a tulip about the billions of poor people who'll supposedly get ****ed over if the doommongers happen to be correct.

[kandr]

The only view anyone with an ounce of intellect can take is that we cannot know for sure at this point if we are having an effect on climate, but we should act as if it we are. That way the worst thing we can be is wrong, rather than extinct.

HTH

[DimPrawn]

The only view anyone with an ounce of intellect can take is that we cannot know for sure at this point if we are having an effect on climate, but we should act as if it we are. That way the worst thing we can be is wrong, rather than extinct.

HTH

Brilliant, shall we tax breathing in and out as well incase this has an impact on the moon? Better safe than sorry I say.

[EternalOptimist]

The only view anyone with an ounce of intellect can take is that we cannot know for sure at this point if we are having an effect on climate, but we should act as if it we are. That way the worst thing we can be is wrong, rather than extinct.

HTH

Only someone with a vast experience of being wrong could talk such nonsense.

[DimPrawn]

Only someone with a vast experience of being wrong could talk such nonsense.

kandr = sasguru

So yes.

[kandr]

Brilliant, shall we tax breathing in and out as well incase this has an impact on the moon? Better safe than sorry I say.

Is there any evidence for this? No, so why make such a silly comparison?

[kandr]

Only someone with a vast experience of being wrong could talk such nonsense.

Can you argue against my point rather than making pathetic insults?, if not then don't make a fool of yourself again.

[EternalOptimist]

Can you argue against my point rather than making pathetic insults?, if not then don't make a fool of yourself again.

argue against your point ?? ok

I have > an ounce of intellect and I disagree with you. so you are wrong yet again

[kandr]

argue against your point ?? ok

I have > an ounce of intellect and I disagree with you. so you are wrong yet again

So you think we should just ignore any evidence, and go about as normal hoping that the coin lands on the your side. To me that's a gamble I would prefer not to take.