A few years ago I read a book called "How Not to Be Wrong" by Jordan Ellenberg that explored a few of the ideas you mention about looking at trendlines. However, based on the examples he used in the book, I suspect he wouldn't approve of how you are employing these techniques. Ha ha.
No, but Ellenberg's examples usually demonstrated how the political right are mathematically illiterate and addicted to misleading trend analyses, through the simple expedient of cherry-picking series data.
You'd never catch America's Paper of Record doing that sort of thing.
I guess I'm still clueless. The article discusses how the cherry picking of a larger data set leads to multiple conclusions depending on framing. The current framing seems to be one of an immediate dire emergency and we must return to 1890 immediately if not sooner. I sense that fracking producing gas has helped reduce coal use and we ought to see good progress on nuclear. Thus we are progressing as technology improves and the urgency in the US and EU is killing resources needed to improve conditions elsewhere where fewer alternatives exist. The alarmists are forcing solutions that actually harm the global situation.
Another interesting look at the data. I keep waiting for that tipping point that never seems to arrive. I am always stunned at the power of nature to pretty much undo whatever we have been doing. Entire civilizations buried by time and nature. The power of a single volcanic eruption to blot out the sun for long periods. And humans continue to adapt and evolve.
At a current rate of 1.8mm per year, we can expect the sea level to rise 20 feet in 3,387 years. So if you own any oceanfront property, you really need to dispose of it as quickly as you can.
A few years ago I read a book called "How Not to Be Wrong" by Jordan Ellenberg that explored a few of the ideas you mention about looking at trendlines. However, based on the examples he used in the book, I suspect he wouldn't approve of how you are employing these techniques. Ha ha.
Was there an error of analysis in the article? I found it interesting and pointing out how we are misusing some data.
No, but Ellenberg's examples usually demonstrated how the political right are mathematically illiterate and addicted to misleading trend analyses, through the simple expedient of cherry-picking series data.
You'd never catch America's Paper of Record doing that sort of thing.
I guess I'm still clueless. The article discusses how the cherry picking of a larger data set leads to multiple conclusions depending on framing. The current framing seems to be one of an immediate dire emergency and we must return to 1890 immediately if not sooner. I sense that fracking producing gas has helped reduce coal use and we ought to see good progress on nuclear. Thus we are progressing as technology improves and the urgency in the US and EU is killing resources needed to improve conditions elsewhere where fewer alternatives exist. The alarmists are forcing solutions that actually harm the global situation.
Here's to saying politically incorrect things!
Another interesting look at the data. I keep waiting for that tipping point that never seems to arrive. I am always stunned at the power of nature to pretty much undo whatever we have been doing. Entire civilizations buried by time and nature. The power of a single volcanic eruption to blot out the sun for long periods. And humans continue to adapt and evolve.
At a current rate of 1.8mm per year, we can expect the sea level to rise 20 feet in 3,387 years. So if you own any oceanfront property, you really need to dispose of it as quickly as you can.