Post by intothenight on Jun 10, 2019 6:00:29 GMT
It has occurred to me that there is a lot of numbers being thrown around to prove this or prove that. This thread will concentrate on presenting data that either support or falsifies whether global warming is taking place, and if so, by how much.
A few rules (as always!):
1. Since anyone can make up numbers or quote numbers from someone else that did, any data presented here must conform to the following limitations:
a. the source must be known. It does not have be well known, but it must be known.
b. the data must be in raw form (no fudging allowed, and no composites of data allowed) unless you can show the equation the modification used and the justification for that equation. Note that composite data such as central NOAA composite temperatures are not admissible here. Individual station data, however, is.
2. the data must be presented in the actual forum. A link may be used to back up the quotation, but a copy of the data must be here for all to see without using the link.
3. The methodology of collecting the data must be available. In other words, how was the data actually collected (the mechanisms, the instrumentation, etc). Be prepared to produce that information on demand. It would be best to show it up front.
4. The range of the data must be shown. The range of collection period, in other words.
5. The reliability of the data collection apparatus must be shown. Data collected over a long period of time is particularly susceptible to equipment failures or failures related to influences not part of the collection methodology.
6. If a plot is used, the scales must be linear (unless the units themselves are logarithmic), and must be referenced against a zero for the ground reference (axis reference).
7. Computed or modeled data is not data and is therefore not admissible.
8. Conclusions based on the data should be restricted to that data only. No conclusions from conclusions. In other words, you can show a town is warming, but concluding that proves global warming is not permissible. Neither is listing or conjecturing catastrophes that will result from a particular plot or dataset. This leaves the reader free to determine their own conclusion of the data from the actual data, not unrelated conclusions presented with it.
Here on Politiplex, Rule 2 is modified to allow links to be used alone, but may not refer to anything behind a paywall. Further, rule 1b is modified to allow composited data, but ONLY if all components of such compositions are provided as well and the method of compositing. It is still encouraged to provide the actual data here without requiring chasing links, however, as the original rule 2 specified.
A few rules (as always!):
1. Since anyone can make up numbers or quote numbers from someone else that did, any data presented here must conform to the following limitations:
a. the source must be known. It does not have be well known, but it must be known.
b. the data must be in raw form (no fudging allowed, and no composites of data allowed) unless you can show the equation the modification used and the justification for that equation. Note that composite data such as central NOAA composite temperatures are not admissible here. Individual station data, however, is.
2. the data must be presented in the actual forum. A link may be used to back up the quotation, but a copy of the data must be here for all to see without using the link.
3. The methodology of collecting the data must be available. In other words, how was the data actually collected (the mechanisms, the instrumentation, etc). Be prepared to produce that information on demand. It would be best to show it up front.
4. The range of the data must be shown. The range of collection period, in other words.
5. The reliability of the data collection apparatus must be shown. Data collected over a long period of time is particularly susceptible to equipment failures or failures related to influences not part of the collection methodology.
6. If a plot is used, the scales must be linear (unless the units themselves are logarithmic), and must be referenced against a zero for the ground reference (axis reference).
7. Computed or modeled data is not data and is therefore not admissible.
8. Conclusions based on the data should be restricted to that data only. No conclusions from conclusions. In other words, you can show a town is warming, but concluding that proves global warming is not permissible. Neither is listing or conjecturing catastrophes that will result from a particular plot or dataset. This leaves the reader free to determine their own conclusion of the data from the actual data, not unrelated conclusions presented with it.
Here on Politiplex, Rule 2 is modified to allow links to be used alone, but may not refer to anything behind a paywall. Further, rule 1b is modified to allow composited data, but ONLY if all components of such compositions are provided as well and the method of compositing. It is still encouraged to provide the actual data here without requiring chasing links, however, as the original rule 2 specified.