Actually, correlation does imply causation. It just doesn't mean causation.
Besides, a trend doesn't not implicate a cause out of necessity. Larry said the data showed a sustained increase in average temperature since 1890, therefore he's willing to be that it will be warmer 20 years from now than it is today. A child sees the sun come up every day of their life. They are willing to bet that the pattern will repeat and the sun will be coming up tomorrow. They do not generally understand why the sun will come up tomorrow but their belief in the pattern is none the less rational. There is a pretty clear pattern, haters not withstanding. There is disagreement about the underlying mechanics and the degree to which human activity plays a dominant role in the trend. Some people want to bet against the pattern and they have their reasons for it. That's pretty much the big picture. Judah On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]> wrote: > > That's a nice mantra, keep believing it. Myself I prefer the extended > version of the saying: > > Correlation does not imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows > suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing "look over there". > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> correlation != causation (unless, so it seems, that it supports your >> position) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:310205 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
