I did not say any researchers are choosing data willy-nilly and I haven't said anything about cherry-picking. I was talking about YOU and only you.
You said above that you're looking for any data on outgoing longwave radiation (OLR) that you can find.
gui: "3 - I may very well be wrong about my assertion that total OLR does not correlate with CO2 - I have had a hard time finding papers on the topic."
I observed, based on that, that "if one were to just pick willy-nilly, as you're in effect doing by hunting and pecking for any OLR data you can find, then one is at risk of comparing a pair of years such as 2002 and 2008, and leaping to the egregiously wrong assumption of a cooling trend." And then I asked:
"Exactly what methodology are you using to ensure you are not doing likewise in your analyses of OLR differences over intervals of several years?"
That question did not assume any malice or intent to deceive on your part. It's just the kind of information about how you're handling the data you have that would be required if you were doing the quality of work that could pass peer review. And if I'm going to consider your work seriously as a challenge to work that HAS passed peer review, then you bet, I'm going to demand that information from you or reject your claims out of hand.
About Climate Change
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment