Namdrol on 14/1/2010 at 11:47
No evidence was provided.
A small amount of data was extracted from a larger set and looked at out of context.
If this isn't true, please explain to me my mistake.
Fragony on 14/1/2010 at 11:54
Quote Posted by Namdrol
No evidence was provided.
A small amount of data was extracted from a larger set and looked at out of context.
If this isn't true, please explain to me my mistake.
Forgot what the hacked e-mails were about?
glad you like greater contexts by the way, here is one
(
http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/vostok.png)
Namdrol on 14/1/2010 at 12:04
I'm sorry, that graph you linked to was meaningless.
I know you are a historian so you surely must have some understanding of presenting data.
There was no title so we don't know what it was about, the axis weren't labelled and there was no key.
So all it was is a few numbers, a couple of straight lines and a blue wiggly one.
As I said meaningless.
Over the last 130 years there has been an average rise in temperature. (
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/csci/) link
To pluck a 10 year period out of that data and base your argument on that is ludicrous.
Fragony on 14/1/2010 at 12:11
Know all the tricks, you will see a hockey-stick if you just take out a hundred years, it's a good thing for the holy that they like hokey-sticks so much as there are thousands of them. Heywood posted the same graph but with CO2 and dust in case you are interested.
To pluck a 10 year period out of that data and base your argument on that is ludicrous.
Yeah and taking out a 100 out of eternity is being smart.
Sulphur on 14/1/2010 at 12:21
I think we have our new (with 100% more broken analogies and second language influence) buglunch.
Fragony on 14/1/2010 at 12:29
Quote Posted by Sulphur
and second language influence
Oh really, why don't you hint me in the right direction and tell me where I got it wrong. Why do people insist to throw it on language when a graph is pretty universal? It's the same thing in English and Dutch German and whatever.
chew before swallowing
Namdrol on 14/1/2010 at 12:45
I did tell you were you got it wrong.
A meaningless graph is meaningless in any language
(The graph heywood gave us was labelled and he then went on to interpret it)
And yes, to pluck a 100 years out of eternity is meaningless if this is the only data you are going to consider.
But this is only part of a far larger analysis, where as your whole argument seems to be based on a single 10 year period of data, (and fear, but that's one for the psych boys).
Sulphur on 14/1/2010 at 12:45
Quote Posted by Fragony
Oh really, why don't you hint me in the right direction and tell me where I got it wrong. Why do people insist to throw it on language when a graph is pretty universal? It's the same thing in English and Dutch German and whatever.
chew before swallowing
Ah, but you're mistaken if you think I'm talking science or numbers at this point. I've already seen that there's very little point having a credible discussion on either with you.
Buglunch used to be a member of TTLG a long while ago with a very abstract and singularly unique posting style.
So I was actually paying you a compliment
(and i don't know what you've been eating lately bud but some things are better off not being bitten into, thankyouverymuch)
Fragony on 14/1/2010 at 12:52
Quote Posted by Namdrol
I did tell you were you got it wrong.
A meaningless graph is meaningless in any language
It's not a meaningless graph it's a graph of fluctuating global temperature over a period of 40.000 years.
@Sulphur, sorry I misunderstood you
Namdrol on 14/1/2010 at 13:01
Quote Posted by Namdrol
...it is a few numbers, a couple of straight lines and a blue wiggly one.
As I said meaningless...
:rolleyes:
