Those are not "independent" in a statistical sense. Quite the
contrary. "In probability theory, to say that two events are
independent intuitively means that the occurrence of one event makes
it neither more nor less probable that the other occurs." (wikipedia)
I'm not saying it isn't warming. I'm saying your numbers don't mean
anything. Getting statistics right is a very subtle thing sometimes.
It is also overvalued in global change discussions in my opinion. You
will note that statistical climatologists tend to be much less on the
alarmist side than physical climatologists and paleoclimatologists.
We can't fix this by doing bad statistics, though. We need *more*
subtle statistics than are common rather than more simpleminded ones
to get useful numbers. The statistical methods need to in some sense
know something about the physics.
mt
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
