Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Is global warming just another End-of-the-World delusion?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lucy Stulz" data-source="post: 63320127" data-attributes="member: 328376"><p>Lucy has been busy <strong><em>DOING SOME MATHEMATICAL/STATISTICAL ANALYSES</em></strong> in regards to the topic. It's called doing some work rather than just picking stuff apart.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I showed you, explicitly, in the post above, that CHANGING EVERY COUNT DOWN BY 25% <em>IN JUST THE CE GROUP</em> doesn't change the results from the "example" I gave.</p><p></p><p>So how would 17% change IN ONE AUTHOR'S COUNT affect the results???</p><p></p><p>817 researchers, this amounts to ONE RESEARCHER whose "count value" (x-axis value) will drop by 17%. Show me how 0.1% shift in the mean of a skewed distribution will affect the overall conclusion.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Same questions.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is arbitrarily established as a "cutoff filter". But again, YOU could run your own analysis.</p><p></p><p>But then you wouldn't be doing the same type of research. Because there are people who can get maybe one publication in a field WHO ARE NOT CAPABLE RESEARCHERS, certainly not EXPERT.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>THis is your funniest question because it really has NO BEARING ON THIS TYPE OF STUDY.</p><p></p><p>Do you even understand what Anderegg et al were doing? Because when you ask this question you make it clear you really don't.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps we can talk about the MATHEMATICAL AND STATISTICAL IMPLICATIONS of your critiques.</p><p></p><p>Of course that will require you do some work too. I've been the one to actually do some work here.</p><p></p><p>I can do more if you like.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lucy Stulz, post: 63320127, member: 328376"] Lucy has been busy [B][I]DOING SOME MATHEMATICAL/STATISTICAL ANALYSES[/I][/B] in regards to the topic. It's called doing some work rather than just picking stuff apart. I showed you, explicitly, in the post above, that CHANGING EVERY COUNT DOWN BY 25% [I]IN JUST THE CE GROUP[/I] doesn't change the results from the "example" I gave. So how would 17% change IN ONE AUTHOR'S COUNT affect the results??? 817 researchers, this amounts to ONE RESEARCHER whose "count value" (x-axis value) will drop by 17%. Show me how 0.1% shift in the mean of a skewed distribution will affect the overall conclusion. Same questions. This is arbitrarily established as a "cutoff filter". But again, YOU could run your own analysis. But then you wouldn't be doing the same type of research. Because there are people who can get maybe one publication in a field WHO ARE NOT CAPABLE RESEARCHERS, certainly not EXPERT. THis is your funniest question because it really has NO BEARING ON THIS TYPE OF STUDY. Do you even understand what Anderegg et al were doing? Because when you ask this question you make it clear you really don't. Perhaps we can talk about the MATHEMATICAL AND STATISTICAL IMPLICATIONS of your critiques. Of course that will require you do some work too. I've been the one to actually do some work here. I can do more if you like. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Is global warming just another End-of-the-World delusion?
Top
Bottom