Science Forums 2

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by engineerdude

CraigD, when you ran your correlation, why did you omit the most recent data? What is actually happening right now is the best data we have - we know more precisely than ever very exact levels of CO2 and temperature.

I used all of the data published in the source I cited in post #970, ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/pal.../domec_co2.txt and ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/pal...uttemp2007.txt (Valérie Masson-Delmotte). These data don’t include CO2 values after 1515 AD, or before 9003 BC.

Engineerdude, please provide the URLs for the data you used to make the chart in post #964, or, if not available via a URL, upload them as attachments.

Note, however, that a correctly generated correlation coefficient must sample evenly over the two datasets’ shared variable – in this case, date, so many datapoints from a short interval, such as CO2 concentration and temperatures since 1960, will have less effect than a few datapoints from a long interval, such as the 5 data from dc_co2_hol_fl02.txt for 7982 BC to 7118 BC.