My belief in Global Warming is getting shaky

[Little Bang]

Amen Freez, and to explain it all you have to do is look at the Republican party and the democratic party. Ninety % of both party members have always been a member of their respective parties and don't give a rat's rear end about what their candidate stands for, their going to vote for him or her anyway.

[Zythryn]

Grains, I am not sure I understand you, are you being sarcastic?
Your very own graph that you posted shows an increasing trend of temperature.
And yes, continuing to monitor long term trends is important. However, we also need to be aware that if we wait to react until it is obvious to everyone then we simply won't be able to mitigate the effects on humanity.

[Grains]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

Grains, I am not sure I understand you, are you being sarcastic?
Your very own graph that you posted shows an increasing trend of temperature.
And yes, continuing to monitor long term trends is important. However, we also need to be aware that if we wait to react until it is obvious to everyone then we simply won't be able to mitigate the effects on humanity.

I am not being sarcastic at all.....and my graph does indicate and increasing trend it indicates quite the opposite....it broke support (actually I would like to correct myself it was late last night i should have written support as opposed to resistance) which highly indicates a downward trend is upon us..we have to look at the trends as a whole...i have attached another graph to emphasize this point and show that actually it is moving down and broke its support.

[Grains]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

Grains, I am not sure I understand you, are you being sarcastic?
Your very own graph that you posted shows an increasing trend of temperature.
And yes, continuing to monitor long term trends is important. However, we also need to be aware that if we wait to react until it is obvious to everyone then we simply won't be able to mitigate the effects on humanity.

Your absolutely correct that we need to do something before we won't be able to mitigate the effects on humanity...I guess I differ because I try to concentrate on what I believe are real environmental issues that I believe could hurt our future...The problem to me is that real environmental issues get ignored because of the theory of global warming...which I believe is false.

[InfiniteNow]

First, your trendline in this second picture is wrong. You'd have failed statistics class if you tried to pull that one over. It actually looks like you're showing a displaced inverse trend, but I don't really care. The data shows a positive trend, and the only way it doesn't is if you arbitrarily set the start and stop points to some nonrepresentative time segment (oh wait... that's exactly what you've done ).

Also, you mention that you don't believe in global warming. That's the beauty of science and reality. Neither give a flying fornication what you believe if it's not supported by evidence and testable predictions.

[Grains]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

First, your trendline in this second picture is wrong. You'd have failed statistics class if you tried to pull that one over. It actually looks like you're showing a displaced inverse trend, but I don't really care. The data shows a positive trend, and the only way it doesn't is if you arbitrarily set the start and stop points to some nonrepresentative time segment (oh wait... that's exactly what you've done ).

Also, you mention that you don't believe in global warming. That's the beauty of science and reality. Neither give a flying fornication what you believe if it's not supported by evidence and testable predictions.

in charting there is no right/wrong way to draw trendlines... that's the first time I have ever heard someone say that

again breaking support is not a positive trend!!! cci and macd stochastic also confirm this trend

you cannot prove it does exist...

Global Warming Hoax: Content / No Consensus / Manuscript by Don J. Easterbrook, PHD

Another Ice Age? - TIME

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by Grains

in charting there is no right/wrong way to draw trendlines... that's the first time I have ever heard someone say that

again breaking support is not a positive trend!!! cci and macd stochastic also confirm this trend

Hmmm... Okay. In fairness, let's see the raw data.

Once you've shared the raw data I (and all others who are so inclined) can graph it and plot a trendline themselves.

This would be the appropriate thing for you to do, since transparency is critical for good science. Ideally, you should provide one column with the date and the other column with the temperature measurement.

If I'm wrong about your trendline, then I will admit it here openly, but not until I see the raw data which fed the graph you posted.


EDIT: Was it from here? http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3.../nh+sh/monthly


Also, with all of this "trendline correctness" is out of the way, my assertion that you've arbitrarily chosen start and end dates to demonstrate the pattern you wanted (aka cherry picking) remains.


Since you've limited your graph to one decade, I'll try to "one up" you by showing one which is limited to only the last 150 years (actually, I guess that would make the graph I shared below 15x better than yours, wouldn't it?):


CRU Information Sheet no. 1: Global Temperature Record

Btw... the same people whose name is at the top of the graph you shared also put this one out:

Finally... Your childish appeals to ridicule are wasted on me. I'll call you a dumbass and show everyone reading why it's true before I let some stupid picture of "NewsWeak" make me reject my opinion which is grounded in facts and evidence.

[Grains]

Also, with all of this "trendline correctness" out of the way, my assertion that you've arbitrarily chosen start and end dates to demonstrate the pattern you wanted remains.

Ive posted the graph going back farther to 1988 like the original.. I was just trying to shorten it up...see the trend..

i haven't arbitrarily chosen start and end dates for this particular graph... i was just using the graph I first posted but I see where you are going with this and you are correct...it absolutely depends on where you choose to start and end....i have never argued that..thats why when you said my trendlines were wrong and i said trend lines cannot be wrong....its in the eye of the beholder

Btw... Your appeals to ridicule are wasted on me. I'll call you a dumbass and show why it's true before I let some stupid picture of "NewsWeak" make me feel that I am wrong.

[/QUOTE]

????
Not trying to ridicule you. I don't see how calling me a dumbass has anything to do with anything or proves your point stronger...but you are entitled to your opinion....

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by Grains

i haven't arbitrarily chosen start and end dates for this particular graph...

But, indeed you have. It's proven again where you split your "trend" lines into the decades to show what you wanted in your most recent reply.

I'd still like to see the raw data. You keep putting lines on the pictures as if you're using some sort of Paint software. If you wish to continue the trend discussion, then share the source data first so we're on a level playing field.

Regardless, that's sort of pointless since your short term anomaly does not negate the centeries of other data I shared, and the "anomaly" becomes completely irrelevant if you don't arbitrarily set the start time of your graph at 1998 (one of the hottest years on record).

Originally Posted by Grains

Not trying to ridicule you. I don't see how calling me a dumbass has anything to do with anything or proves your point stronger...but you are entitled to your opinion....

I never said you were ridiculing me. I said you were trying to make your own position seem stronger and my position seem weaker through use of this particular logical fallacy.


Appeal to ridicule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Also, I haven't yet called you a dumbass. Consider it me firing a warning shot over your bow. Your posts have been deteriorating in quality since the challenge to your assertions began. I suggest you do some research before posting again and supply references in support of your postions so as not to look ignorant when your assertions are proven false or misrepresentative. Let's say this was just me being altruistic and trying to help you avoid that outcome.

[Grains]

Once you've shared the raw data I (and all others who are so inclined) can graph it and plot a trendline themselves.

This would be the appropriate thing for you to do, since transparency is critical for good science. Ideally, you should provide one column with the date and the other column with the temperature measurement.

You don't necesarrily need raw data for trendlines... if you have the chart in front of you you can draw trendlines ...for linear regression (i think what your indicating) you do..

Trend Lines - StockCharts.com

If I'm wrong about your trendline, then I will admit it here openly, but not until I see the raw data which fed the graph you posted.

Again trendlines cannot be wrong...eye of beholder...what were you saying about if you were wrong.

EDIT: Was it from here? http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3.../nh+sh/monthly

Yes that is where the raw data is from..but again they had already created the chart...

Also, with all of this "trendline correctness" is out of the way, my assertion that you've arbitrarily chosen start and end dates to demonstrate the pattern you wanted (aka cherry picking) remains.

I only demonstrated from the original chart I posted...I haven't brought new charts into the picture but yes one could cherry pick his start and end points but it does not mean that it is not in a down or up trend....for whatever time period one chooses the trend still remains true for that time period..

Since you've limited your graph to one decade, I'll try to "one up" you by showing one which is limited to only the last 150 years (actually, I guess that would make the graph I shared below 15x better than yours, wouldn't it?):

Ok if longer equals better I can play that...I have posted a chart that goes back 600 million years so that makes mine 600 million times better than yours

Btw... the same people whose name is at the top of the graph you shared also put this one out:

Yes they did. What does that have to do with my trendline being wrong?