How do we Know Human are Causing Climate Change?

None of those are crossplots. You literally have to plot CO2 versus temperature. Provide the data that is acceptable to you and I will crossplot it for you because you don't seem capable of doing so yourself.
How much education do you think is required to make a scatter plot in Excel Whizzo? I hear lots of claims from lots of deniers that, when pressed, demand that I do the work of demonstrating their claims. I have to assume, given all the marvelous things you've claimed for the value of cross plots, that you have seen them, have studied them and have made them. You claim that a crossplot will not show the correlation that every scientist on the planet assumes as fact. This is an extraordinary claim. Thus it is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence, not me.
None of those are crossplots. You literally have to plot CO2 versus temperature. Provide the data that is acceptable to you and I will crossplot it for you because you don't seem capable of doing so yourself.
1688322214989.png

YEAR​
ppm CO2​
Temp Anom​
1850​
284.7​
-0.20​
1851​
284.7​
-0.09​
1852​
284.7​
0.00​
1853​
284.7​
-0.12​
1854​
284.7​
-0.08​
1855​
285.4​
-0.13​
1856​
285.4​
-0.12​
1857​
285.4​
-0.34​
1858​
285.4​
-0.21​
1859​
285.4​
-0.09​
1860​
286.2​
-0.15​
1861​
286.2​
-0.24​
1862​
286.2​
-0.34​
1863​
286.2​
-0.11​
1864​
286.2​
-0.12​
1865​
286.9​
-0.16​
1866​
286.9​
-0.17​
1867​
286.9​
-0.26​
1868​
286.9​
0.00​
1869​
286.9​
-0.11​
1870​
287.5​
-0.10​
1871​
287.5​
-0.12​
1872​
287.5​
-0.16​
1873​
287.5​
-0.29​
1874​
287.5​
-0.29​
1875​
288.7​
-0.09​
1876​
288.7​
-0.34​
1877​
288.7​
-0.03​
1878​
288.7​
0.05​
1879​
288.7​
-0.04​
1880​
290.7​
-0.06​
1881​
290.7​
0.00​
1882​
290.7​
-0.18​
1883​
290.7​
-0.16​
1884​
290.7​
-0.31​
1885​
293.0​
-0.40​
1886​
293.0​
-0.21​
1887​
293.0​
-0.26​
1888​
293.0​
-0.15​
1889​
293.0​
0.02​
1890​
294.2​
-0.26​
1891​
294.2​
-0.10​
1892​
294.2​
-0.16​
1893​
294.2​
-0.31​
1894​
294.2​
-0.20​
1895​
294.8​
-0.18​
1896​
294.8​
-0.06​
1897​
294.8​
0.10​
1898​
294.8​
-0.20​
1899​
294.8​
-0.18​
1900​
295.8​
-0.05​
1901​
295.8​
-0.08​
1902​
295.8​
-0.27​
1903​
295.8​
-0.33​
1904​
295.8​
-0.45​
1905​
297.6​
-0.24​
1906​
297.6​
-0.20​
1907​
297.6​
-0.38​
1908​
297.6​
-0.34​
1909​
297.6​
-0.48​
1910​
299.7​
-0.30​
1911​
299.7​
-0.46​
1912​
299.7​
-0.18​
1913​
299.7​
-0.40​
1914​
299.7​
-0.19​
1915​
301.4​
0.00​
1916​
301.4​
-0.25​
1917​
301.4​
-0.52​
1918​
301.4​
-0.39​
1919​
301.4​
-0.22​
1920​
303.0​
-0.25​
1921​
303.0​
-0.21​
1922​
303.0​
-0.27​
1923​
303.0​
-0.27​
1924​
303.0​
-0.10​
1925​
305.0​
-0.24​
1926​
305.0​
-0.16​
1927​
305.0​
-0.20​
1928​
305.0​
-0.17​
1929​
305.0​
-0.31​
1930​
307.2​
-0.16​
1931​
307.2​
-0.13​
1932​
307.2​
-0.14​
1933​
307.2​
-0.24​
1934​
307.2​
-0.07​
1935​
309.4​
-0.23​
1936​
309.4​
-0.07​
1937​
309.4​
-0.01​
1938​
309.4​
-0.03​
1939​
309.4​
-0.01​
1940​
310.4​
0.16​
1941​
310.4​
0.21​
1942​
310.4​
0.15​
1943​
310.4​
0.13​
1944​
310.4​
0.24​
1945​
310.1​
0.12​
1946​
310.1​
-0.02​
1947​
310.1​
0.02​
1948​
310.1​
0.05​
1949​
310.1​
-0.04​
1950​
310.7​
-0.02​
1951​
310.7​
0.04​
1952​
310.7​
0.08​
1953​
310.7​
0.20​
1954​
310.7​
-0.12​
1955​
313.0​
-0.16​
1956​
313.0​
-0.27​
1957​
313.0​
0.05​
1958​
313.0​
0.10​
1959​
313.0​
0.04​
1960​
316.9​
-0.05​
1961​
316.9​
0.04​
1962​
316.9​
0.01​
1963​
316.9​
-0.02​
1964​
316.9​
-0.15​
1965​
320.0​
-0.20​
1966​
320.0​
-0.11​
1967​
320.0​
0.21​
1968​
320.0​
-0.17​
1969​
320.0​
0.18​
1970​
325.0​
0.05​
1971​
325.0​
-0.03​
1972​
325.0​
0.00​
1973​
325.0​
0.24​
1974​
325.0​
-0.02​
1975​
331.3​
0.08​
1976​
331.3​
-0.12​
1977​
331.3​
0.28​
1978​
334.6​
0.10​
1979​
336.7​
0.17​
1980​
338.7​
0.38​
1981​
339.7​
0.31​
1982​
340.9​
0.17​
1983​
342.5​
0.28​
1984​
344.1​
0.31​
1985​
345.5​
0.22​
1986​
346.9​
0.35​
1987​
348.5​
0.33​
1988​
350.9​
0.48​
1989​
352.6​
0.24​
1990​
353.7​
0.50​
1991​
355.2​
0.43​
1992​
355.9​
0.37​
1993​
356.6​
0.31​
1994​
358.2​
0.32​
1995​
360.2​
0.32​
1996​
362.0​
0.34​
1997​
363.2​
0.41​
1998​
365.7​
0.69​
1999​
367.8​
0.33​
2000​
368.9​
0.38​
2001​
370.4​
0.58​
2002​
372.5​
0.66​
2003​
375.1​
0.63​
2004​
376.6​
0.42​
2005​
379.0​
0.70​
2006​
381.2​
0.52​
2007​
382.9​
0.65​
2008​
385.0​
0.52​
2009​
386.4​
0.62​
2010​
388.7​
0.78​
2011​
390.6​
0.55​
2012​
392.6​
0.75​
2013​
395.5​
0.66​
2014​
397.5​
0.87​
2015​
399.6​
0.82​
2016​
402.9​
0.99​
2017​
405.2​
0.90​
2018​
408.2​
0.81​
2019​
410.5​
0.90​
2020​
414.2​
0.99​
2021​
416.3​
0.80​
2022​
418.6​
0.86​
2023​
419.7​
0.97​

Start weaseling Whizzo.

CO2 from https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-...centration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/download.table
Temperature from NOAA
 
Last edited:
How much education do you think is required to make a scatter plot in Excel Whizzo? I hear lots of claims from lots of deniers that, when pressed, demand that I do the work of demonstrating their claims. I have to assume, given all the marvelous things you've claimed for the value of cross plots, that you have seen them, have studied them and have made them. You claim that a crossplot will not show the correlation that every scientist on the planet assumes as fact. This is an extraordinary claim. Thus it is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence, not me.

View attachment 800793
YEAR​
ppm CO2​
Temp Anom​
1850​
284.7​
-0.20​
1851​
284.7​
-0.09​
1852​
284.7​
0.00​
1853​
284.7​
-0.12​
1854​
284.7​
-0.08​
1855​
285.4​
-0.13​
1856​
285.4​
-0.12​
1857​
285.4​
-0.34​
1858​
285.4​
-0.21​
1859​
285.4​
-0.09​
1860​
286.2​
-0.15​
1861​
286.2​
-0.24​
1862​
286.2​
-0.34​
1863​
286.2​
-0.11​
1864​
286.2​
-0.12​
1865​
286.9​
-0.16​
1866​
286.9​
-0.17​
1867​
286.9​
-0.26​
1868​
286.9​
0.00​
1869​
286.9​
-0.11​
1870​
287.5​
-0.10​
1871​
287.5​
-0.12​
1872​
287.5​
-0.16​
1873​
287.5​
-0.29​
1874​
287.5​
-0.29​
1875​
288.7​
-0.09​
1876​
288.7​
-0.34​
1877​
288.7​
-0.03​
1878​
288.7​
0.05​
1879​
288.7​
-0.04​
1880​
290.7​
-0.06​
1881​
290.7​
0.00​
1882​
290.7​
-0.18​
1883​
290.7​
-0.16​
1884​
290.7​
-0.31​
1885​
293.0​
-0.40​
1886​
293.0​
-0.21​
1887​
293.0​
-0.26​
1888​
293.0​
-0.15​
1889​
293.0​
0.02​
1890​
294.2​
-0.26​
1891​
294.2​
-0.10​
1892​
294.2​
-0.16​
1893​
294.2​
-0.31​
1894​
294.2​
-0.20​
1895​
294.8​
-0.18​
1896​
294.8​
-0.06​
1897​
294.8​
0.10​
1898​
294.8​
-0.20​
1899​
294.8​
-0.18​
1900​
295.8​
-0.05​
1901​
295.8​
-0.08​
1902​
295.8​
-0.27​
1903​
295.8​
-0.33​
1904​
295.8​
-0.45​
1905​
297.6​
-0.24​
1906​
297.6​
-0.20​
1907​
297.6​
-0.38​
1908​
297.6​
-0.34​
1909​
297.6​
-0.48​
1910​
299.7​
-0.30​
1911​
299.7​
-0.46​
1912​
299.7​
-0.18​
1913​
299.7​
-0.40​
1914​
299.7​
-0.19​
1915​
301.4​
0.00​
1916​
301.4​
-0.25​
1917​
301.4​
-0.52​
1918​
301.4​
-0.39​
1919​
301.4​
-0.22​
1920​
303.0​
-0.25​
1921​
303.0​
-0.21​
1922​
303.0​
-0.27​
1923​
303.0​
-0.27​
1924​
303.0​
-0.10​
1925​
305.0​
-0.24​
1926​
305.0​
-0.16​
1927​
305.0​
-0.20​
1928​
305.0​
-0.17​
1929​
305.0​
-0.31​
1930​
307.2​
-0.16​
1931​
307.2​
-0.13​
1932​
307.2​
-0.14​
1933​
307.2​
-0.24​
1934​
307.2​
-0.07​
1935​
309.4​
-0.23​
1936​
309.4​
-0.07​
1937​
309.4​
-0.01​
1938​
309.4​
-0.03​
1939​
309.4​
-0.01​
1940​
310.4​
0.16​
1941​
310.4​
0.21​
1942​
310.4​
0.15​
1943​
310.4​
0.13​
1944​
310.4​
0.24​
1945​
310.1​
0.12​
1946​
310.1​
-0.02​
1947​
310.1​
0.02​
1948​
310.1​
0.05​
1949​
310.1​
-0.04​
1950​
310.7​
-0.02​
1951​
310.7​
0.04​
1952​
310.7​
0.08​
1953​
310.7​
0.20​
1954​
310.7​
-0.12​
1955​
313.0​
-0.16​
1956​
313.0​
-0.27​
1957​
313.0​
0.05​
1958​
313.0​
0.10​
1959​
313.0​
0.04​
1960​
316.9​
-0.05​
1961​
316.9​
0.04​
1962​
316.9​
0.01​
1963​
316.9​
-0.02​
1964​
316.9​
-0.15​
1965​
320.0​
-0.20​
1966​
320.0​
-0.11​
1967​
320.0​
0.21​
1968​
320.0​
-0.17​
1969​
320.0​
0.18​
1970​
325.0​
0.05​
1971​
325.0​
-0.03​
1972​
325.0​
0.00​
1973​
325.0​
0.24​
1974​
325.0​
-0.02​
1975​
331.3​
0.08​
1976​
331.3​
-0.12​
1977​
331.3​
0.28​
1978​
334.6​
0.10​
1979​
336.7​
0.17​
1980​
338.7​
0.38​
1981​
339.7​
0.31​
1982​
340.9​
0.17​
1983​
342.5​
0.28​
1984​
344.1​
0.31​
1985​
345.5​
0.22​
1986​
346.9​
0.35​
1987​
348.5​
0.33​
1988​
350.9​
0.48​
1989​
352.6​
0.24​
1990​
353.7​
0.50​
1991​
355.2​
0.43​
1992​
355.9​
0.37​
1993​
356.6​
0.31​
1994​
358.2​
0.32​
1995​
360.2​
0.32​
1996​
362.0​
0.34​
1997​
363.2​
0.41​
1998​
365.7​
0.69​
1999​
367.8​
0.33​
2000​
368.9​
0.38​
2001​
370.4​
0.58​
2002​
372.5​
0.66​
2003​
375.1​
0.63​
2004​
376.6​
0.42​
2005​
379.0​
0.70​
2006​
381.2​
0.52​
2007​
382.9​
0.65​
2008​
385.0​
0.52​
2009​
386.4​
0.62​
2010​
388.7​
0.78​
2011​
390.6​
0.55​
2012​
392.6​
0.75​
2013​
395.5​
0.66​
2014​
397.5​
0.87​
2015​
399.6​
0.82​
2016​
402.9​
0.99​
2017​
405.2​
0.90​
2018​
408.2​
0.81​
2019​
410.5​
0.90​
2020​
414.2​
0.99​
2021​
416.3​
0.80​
2022​
418.6​
0.86​
2023​
419.7​
0.97​

Start weaseling Whizzo.

CO2 from https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-...centration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/download.table
Temperature from NOAA
Great. Now curve fit that to get the equation of the line and the coefficient of fit.
 
Great. Now curve fit that to get the equation of the line and the coefficient of fit.
Pack sand. The curve fit of those data is a straight line because the correlation between CO2 and temperature is as tight as tight can get, fool. If you want to try to show us something different, you get to do the work.
 
Pack sand. The curve fit of those data is a straight line because the correlation between CO2 and temperature is as tight as tight can get, fool. If you want to try to show us something different, you get to do the work.
Should be logarithmic, right?

So what is the equation of the best fit line and what is the coefficient of fit?
 
How much education do you think is required to make a scatter plot in Excel Whizzo? I hear lots of claims from lots of deniers that, when pressed, demand that I do the work of demonstrating their claims. I have to assume, given all the marvelous things you've claimed for the value of cross plots, that you have seen them, have studied them and have made them. You claim that a crossplot will not show the correlation that every scientist on the planet assumes as fact. This is an extraordinary claim. Thus it is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence, not me.

View attachment 800793
YEAR​
ppm CO2​
Temp Anom​
1850​
284.7​
-0.20​
1851​
284.7​
-0.09​
1852​
284.7​
0.00​
1853​
284.7​
-0.12​
1854​
284.7​
-0.08​
1855​
285.4​
-0.13​
1856​
285.4​
-0.12​
1857​
285.4​
-0.34​
1858​
285.4​
-0.21​
1859​
285.4​
-0.09​
1860​
286.2​
-0.15​
1861​
286.2​
-0.24​
1862​
286.2​
-0.34​
1863​
286.2​
-0.11​
1864​
286.2​
-0.12​
1865​
286.9​
-0.16​
1866​
286.9​
-0.17​
1867​
286.9​
-0.26​
1868​
286.9​
0.00​
1869​
286.9​
-0.11​
1870​
287.5​
-0.10​
1871​
287.5​
-0.12​
1872​
287.5​
-0.16​
1873​
287.5​
-0.29​
1874​
287.5​
-0.29​
1875​
288.7​
-0.09​
1876​
288.7​
-0.34​
1877​
288.7​
-0.03​
1878​
288.7​
0.05​
1879​
288.7​
-0.04​
1880​
290.7​
-0.06​
1881​
290.7​
0.00​
1882​
290.7​
-0.18​
1883​
290.7​
-0.16​
1884​
290.7​
-0.31​
1885​
293.0​
-0.40​
1886​
293.0​
-0.21​
1887​
293.0​
-0.26​
1888​
293.0​
-0.15​
1889​
293.0​
0.02​
1890​
294.2​
-0.26​
1891​
294.2​
-0.10​
1892​
294.2​
-0.16​
1893​
294.2​
-0.31​
1894​
294.2​
-0.20​
1895​
294.8​
-0.18​
1896​
294.8​
-0.06​
1897​
294.8​
0.10​
1898​
294.8​
-0.20​
1899​
294.8​
-0.18​
1900​
295.8​
-0.05​
1901​
295.8​
-0.08​
1902​
295.8​
-0.27​
1903​
295.8​
-0.33​
1904​
295.8​
-0.45​
1905​
297.6​
-0.24​
1906​
297.6​
-0.20​
1907​
297.6​
-0.38​
1908​
297.6​
-0.34​
1909​
297.6​
-0.48​
1910​
299.7​
-0.30​
1911​
299.7​
-0.46​
1912​
299.7​
-0.18​
1913​
299.7​
-0.40​
1914​
299.7​
-0.19​
1915​
301.4​
0.00​
1916​
301.4​
-0.25​
1917​
301.4​
-0.52​
1918​
301.4​
-0.39​
1919​
301.4​
-0.22​
1920​
303.0​
-0.25​
1921​
303.0​
-0.21​
1922​
303.0​
-0.27​
1923​
303.0​
-0.27​
1924​
303.0​
-0.10​
1925​
305.0​
-0.24​
1926​
305.0​
-0.16​
1927​
305.0​
-0.20​
1928​
305.0​
-0.17​
1929​
305.0​
-0.31​
1930​
307.2​
-0.16​
1931​
307.2​
-0.13​
1932​
307.2​
-0.14​
1933​
307.2​
-0.24​
1934​
307.2​
-0.07​
1935​
309.4​
-0.23​
1936​
309.4​
-0.07​
1937​
309.4​
-0.01​
1938​
309.4​
-0.03​
1939​
309.4​
-0.01​
1940​
310.4​
0.16​
1941​
310.4​
0.21​
1942​
310.4​
0.15​
1943​
310.4​
0.13​
1944​
310.4​
0.24​
1945​
310.1​
0.12​
1946​
310.1​
-0.02​
1947​
310.1​
0.02​
1948​
310.1​
0.05​
1949​
310.1​
-0.04​
1950​
310.7​
-0.02​
1951​
310.7​
0.04​
1952​
310.7​
0.08​
1953​
310.7​
0.20​
1954​
310.7​
-0.12​
1955​
313.0​
-0.16​
1956​
313.0​
-0.27​
1957​
313.0​
0.05​
1958​
313.0​
0.10​
1959​
313.0​
0.04​
1960​
316.9​
-0.05​
1961​
316.9​
0.04​
1962​
316.9​
0.01​
1963​
316.9​
-0.02​
1964​
316.9​
-0.15​
1965​
320.0​
-0.20​
1966​
320.0​
-0.11​
1967​
320.0​
0.21​
1968​
320.0​
-0.17​
1969​
320.0​
0.18​
1970​
325.0​
0.05​
1971​
325.0​
-0.03​
1972​
325.0​
0.00​
1973​
325.0​
0.24​
1974​
325.0​
-0.02​
1975​
331.3​
0.08​
1976​
331.3​
-0.12​
1977​
331.3​
0.28​
1978​
334.6​
0.10​
1979​
336.7​
0.17​
1980​
338.7​
0.38​
1981​
339.7​
0.31​
1982​
340.9​
0.17​
1983​
342.5​
0.28​
1984​
344.1​
0.31​
1985​
345.5​
0.22​
1986​
346.9​
0.35​
1987​
348.5​
0.33​
1988​
350.9​
0.48​
1989​
352.6​
0.24​
1990​
353.7​
0.50​
1991​
355.2​
0.43​
1992​
355.9​
0.37​
1993​
356.6​
0.31​
1994​
358.2​
0.32​
1995​
360.2​
0.32​
1996​
362.0​
0.34​
1997​
363.2​
0.41​
1998​
365.7​
0.69​
1999​
367.8​
0.33​
2000​
368.9​
0.38​
2001​
370.4​
0.58​
2002​
372.5​
0.66​
2003​
375.1​
0.63​
2004​
376.6​
0.42​
2005​
379.0​
0.70​
2006​
381.2​
0.52​
2007​
382.9​
0.65​
2008​
385.0​
0.52​
2009​
386.4​
0.62​
2010​
388.7​
0.78​
2011​
390.6​
0.55​
2012​
392.6​
0.75​
2013​
395.5​
0.66​
2014​
397.5​
0.87​
2015​
399.6​
0.82​
2016​
402.9​
0.99​
2017​
405.2​
0.90​
2018​
408.2​
0.81​
2019​
410.5​
0.90​
2020​
414.2​
0.99​
2021​
416.3​
0.80​
2022​
418.6​
0.86​
2023​
419.7​
0.97​

Start weaseling Whizzo.

CO2 from https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-...centration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/download.table
Temperature from NOAA
It’s hilarious, your own data shows no correlation
 
Should be logarithmic, right?

So what is the equation of the best fit line and what is the coefficient of fit?
Let me know when you've actually taken the time to learn what you claim to already know. And I will do no more of your work. You make a claim, you get to provide the evidence.

There are a number of factors besides CO2 that affect the Earth's temperature: methane, nitrous oxide, aerosols, clouds, deforestation, etc. CO2 is responsible for roughly 70% of warming. Feedback mechanisms and the linearity of small changes to CO2 concentrations lead to a nearly linear relationship. The correlation between CO2 and temperature is robust. Calculations based on the EPICA ice core data show a value of 0.842 + 0. See: On the causal structure between CO2 and global temperature - Scientific Reports.
 
Last edited:
Jesus, do you have a closet full of t-shirts that read "You've never met anyone as stupid as me"?
yet you have no idea how to read the data in the last column of your worksheet. PPM went up and the anomaly didn't change many many times.
 
Let me know when you've actually taken the time to learn what you claim to already know. And I will do no more of your work. You make a claim, you get to provide the evidence.

There are a number of factors besides CO2 that affect the Earth's temperature: methane, nitrous oxide, aerosols, clouds, deforestation, etc. CO2 is responsible for roughly 70% of warming. Feedback mechanisms and the linearity of small changes to CO2 concentrations lead to a nearly linear relationship. The correlation between CO2 and temperature is robust. Calculations based on the EPICA ice core data show a value of 0.842 + 0. See: On the causal structure between CO2 and global temperature - Scientific Reports.
So what is the equation of the best fit line and what is the coefficient of fit?
 
So what is the equation of the best fit line and what is the coefficient of fit?
The correlation coefficient is given in my post. And were you looking for a simple linear regression? Orthogonal regression? Weighted geometric? Deming? Bezier? Major axis? Least squares? Linear least squares? Linear segmented regression? Linear trend estimation? Polynomial regression? Regression dilution?


And, most importantly, what the fuck would you do with it?

PS: do it yourself. It's not my job to make your case. That would be YOUR job.
 
Last edited:
The correlation coefficient is given in my post. And were you looking for a simple linear regression? Orthogonal regression? Weighted geometric? Deming? Bezier? Major axis? Least squares? Linear least squares? Linear segmented regression? Linear trend estimation? Polynomial regression? Regression dilution?


And, most importantly, what the fuck would you do with it?

PS: do it yourself. It's not my job to make your case. That would be YOUR job.
Do you not understand what best fit means? What was the best fit. What is the equation of the line which had the best fit?
 
Do you not understand what best fit means? What was the best fit. What is the equation of the line which had the best fit?
It seems that you are the one unfamiliar with best fit. I told you I will not do your work for you. So pick whatever fit you like and do whatever it is you plan to do with it.
 
It seems that you are the one unfamiliar with best fit. I told you I will not do your work for you. So pick whatever fit you like and do whatever it is you plan to do with it.
Usually one would check the fit for logarithmic, exponential and liner to see which one fit the data the best. Right?
 
I'm just glad you provided data you accept as valid. Especially data that has so much scatter to it.
I do accept that data but it certainly isn't the only valid data and I've never said it was the best data available. It's good to hear that you were never really interested in that data or what it says about warming but were looking for a way to try to trap me in something. Your motive for some time here is not seeking the truth, but trying to get back at me for pointing out all the many ways you've demonstrated your ignorance. Consider a better solution. Stop embarrassing yourself demonstrating your ignorance.
 
I do accept that data but it certainly isn't the only valid data and I've never said it was the best data available. It's good to hear that you were never really interested in that data or what it says about warming but were looking for a way to try to trap me in something. Your motive for some time here is not seeking the truth, but trying to get back at me for pointing out all the many ways you've demonstrated your ignorance. Consider a better solution. Stop embarrassing yourself demonstrating your ignorance.
Sounds like you are crawfishing. Why is there so much scatter in the data?
 
Sounds like you are crawfishing. Why is there so much scatter in the data?
Crawfishing? No one else uses that term in this context.

How much scatter is there? What is its annualized SD? How much scatter do you think there should have been? But, I didn't collect it. NOAA did. If you have any questions, ask NOAA.
 
Crawfishing? No one else uses that term in this context.

How much scatter is there? What is its annualized SD? How much scatter do you think there should have been? But, I didn't collect it. NOAA did. If you have any questions, ask NOAA.
so you can't explain the data you post?
 

Forum List

Back
Top