+ Reply to Thread
Page 15 of 16 FirstFirst ... 513141516 LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 151
  1. #141
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    An update on the pause.

    The earliest month from which the least-squares linear-regression temperature trend to the present does not exceed zero is September 1996.

    That is now 17 years and 6 months with no warming. Ben Santer's 2011 paper was not that long ago, but shows how wrong the models are.
    I probably should have waited for March's figures. It is now 17 years and 8 months.

    Or for those graph loving types.


  2. #142
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    CO2 levels have increased substantially over the last 17 years and 8 months (since August 1996).

    mlo_full_record.jpg

  3. #143
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked
    22
    Reviews
    0
    Why does your graph looks so different to the official graph provided by the REMSS website for their V3.3 TLT data (theirs shows a clear warming trend)? http://images.remss.com/papers/other...sion_Notes.pdf (Page 3).

  4. #144
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by goshawk View Post
    Why does your graph looks so different to the official graph provided by the REMSS website for their V3.3 TLT data (theirs shows a clear warming trend)? http://images.remss.com/papers/other...sion_Notes.pdf (Page 3).
    You need to look at the length of time the graph covers. The one I linked to only plotted the last 17 years and 8 months - which is how long there has been zero warming. The graph on page 3 goes back to the late 70's. The data between the years 1996 and 2014 on both graphs will be the same.

  5. #145
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked
    22
    Reviews
    0
    I would be interested to know how RSS fit their model (which doesn't seem to be in the document, pity.)... I doubt that a simple LS linear regression is the best approach -- given it's a time series (non-independence of points), and it's also got clear periodic effects...

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to goshawk For This Useful Post:

    Clementine Grace  (07-04-2014)

  7. #146
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by goshawk View Post
    I would be interested to know how RSS fit their model (which doesn't seem to be in the document, pity.)... I doubt that a simple LS linear regression is the best approach -- given it's a time series (non-independence of points), and it's also got clear periodic effects...
    I'm not sure what you mean here by 'model'? Are you referring to the trend lines? What approach do you think is more appropriate?

  8. #147
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked
    22
    Reviews
    0
    Well -- I am referring to the statistical model (LS) you are applying to the data to determine the warming (or in your case, no) trend. I must admit, there are probably way more complicated ways of statistically modelling global warming in the current peer-reviewed literature, but with time-series you usually use an auto-regressive model. Just as a disclaimer, I know *some* stats for my work, but I am not a card-carrying statistician nor am I a climate scientist...

    This lecture has alot of info on how to analyse time-series (in R though, you look like your using Excel..?), and even has that Moa series as an example.
    http://www.colorado.edu/geography/cl...ture15_TS2.pdf

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to goshawk For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (08-04-2014),Clementine Grace  (08-04-2014)

  10. #148
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by goshawk View Post
    I must admit, there are probably way more complicated ways of statistically modelling global warming in the current peer-reviewed literature, but with time-series you usually use an auto-regressive model.
    I agree. But it is a simple way to show long term overall trends which is important when predicting (projecting) expected temperature increases in the future.

    You may be interested in Nicola Scafetta's harmonic model. It is going much better than the IPCC's models. His paper is here:
    http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/im..._harmonics.pdf

    A key graph:
    figure.jpg

  11. #149
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked
    22
    Reviews
    0
    But a linear model assumes that the error-terms are iid (independent and identically distributed) -- which it is clearly not the case in your data. You violate the model assumptions by fitting a basic LSLR.

    I appreciate the link to the paper -- but it's not really from a peer-reviewed journal is it? (I had a quick look at what SPPI was...). I also read that the author declines to make his software available to the public which is always a good sign *cough*. Anyhow -- let's just say my argument is with your use of statistics... I don't really care enough to read up on either side of this argument...
    Last edited by goshawk; 09-04-2014 at 13:13.

  12. #150
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by goshawk View Post
    Anyhow -- let's just say my argument is with your use of statistics... I don't really care enough to read up on either side of this argument...
    My use? Or that of climate scientists?


 

Similar Threads

  1. Global Warming Debate is Obsolete
    By kw123 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-12-2013, 07:07
  2. Warming formula in microwave??????
    By curiouschildcare in forum Mixed Breast & Bottle Feeding Support
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-07-2013, 21:16
  3. House warming gift
    By noopy in forum Gifts for Mums and Dads
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 16-05-2013, 11:35

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Pebblebee
Parents spend hours looking for things they need NOW. The keys, the remote, darling daughter's treasured teddy. Stop wasting precious time looking & start finding with Bub Hub reviewed Pebblebee Smart Tag. Simply attach a Pebblebee and find it fast.
sales & new stuffsee all
Bub Hub Sales Listing
HAVING A SALE? Let parents know about it with a Bub Hub Sales listing. Listings are featured on our well trafficked Sales Page + selected randomly to appear on EVERY page
featured supporter
Swim Australia
Swim Australia are the leading learn-to-swim experts, and national swim school authority. With over 600 Registered Swim Schools located across the country, through our aquatic education, we aim to build a Safer, Smarter, Stronger nation of swimmers.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!