Check out this nice video: http://youtu.be/JcNw5p1OlPU
I found this comment near the top: seems to make a lot of sense.
"All global warming droids: Stop equating "global warming", "global climate change", and "man made global warming." These are 3 different things. ONLY one of the three is in question, i.e., "man made global warming." The other two are historical fact, and have come and gone repeatedly. Even if you believe that man's activities are influencing climate, the scientific data proves man's contribution to natural warming is so slight that it must be teased out of the empirical data statistically."
". . . man's contribution to natural warming is so slight that it must be teased out of the empirical data statistically."
Now here is a man after my own heart. If you can't look at the data with your eye and see the conclusion then applying statistical measures to prove one thing or another is usually a fool's errand. If you think you have something the main purpose of statistical reasoning should be to check out if your hunch is really real because your eye can sometimes fool you. Kind of like using 4NT as a Blackwood convention in bridge: not so much to enable you to bid a slam, but rather to keep you out of bad slams.
No comments:
Post a Comment