Coffeehouse Post

Single Post Permalink

View Thread: Matt Ridely on the greening of the planet
  • User profile image

    Yes, because one outlying datapoint alone clearly contradicts a long term trend, especially when that data has a history of fluctuating around the trend Perplexed Come back to me in a decades time with a consistent drop in rate of warming and we'll talk about this...

    (In fact, if one were to take a frequentest approach to probability (which I don't entirely endorse), one could say that 5% of data points would be expected to fall outside the 95% confidence region.)

    And of course scientists devised a theory that fitted the existing data. That's kind if the point. The fact that the theory correctly predicts the known data is really important, because if it didn't it would be utter bunkum.

    EDIT: Also, is the Y-axis showing difference in temperature from a set point in time, or rate of temperature change?