Excellent article.

"The impacts of sea surface temperature..."

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
Excellent article.

"The impacts of sea surface temperature..."

Leave it to you to find a fringe group of kooks in Norway.

The only reason it is fad now this stupid environment thing is because people are making money out of it.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
Excellent article.

"The impacts of sea surface temperature..."

Leave it to you to find a fringe group of kooks in Norway.

And the author is Japanese.

The Green New Scam.

This is not a five-minute read. Did anybody read it in detail?

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
This is not a five-minute read. Did anybody read it in detail?

Well, I did. That's why I posted it. Our contingent here has several, what I thought, were serious students of the so-called C02, methane, human equation causation of global warming and it looks like they aren't interested. There is some very detailed data there in the article with plenty of research to back it.

Hard to take people (like Magine) really serious when they pick and chooses 'data' to support their fears on climate and causes.

It truly is a religion for such people.

"There are strengths and limitations in this study. This study involved a correlational analysis, which cannot identify direct causality. In addition, the effects of terrestrial organisms and volcanoes were not evaluated. These two indicators are difficult to precisely assess from year to year,unlike the CO₂ concentration measurements in Hawaii or human emissions. "

Is this a predictive model, with only four variables? Is there an assumption of time required for a change in one variable to cause a change in another? How long does it take for one change to bring about the other, and is that time interval included in the correlation? Seems like the regression should include this.

Effect(t) = F(Cause(t - interval))

Am I missing something?