Roger Coppock wrote:
On Feb 17, 2:15 pm, Peter Franks wrote:
[ . . . ]
Roger Coppock wrote:
Below are directly observed data for global mean surface
temperature, CO2 concentration, and sunspots for the last
50 years. This is as long as the longest directly
observed record of atmospheric CO2 concentration.
...
As originally posted in spawning thread:

Why only 50 years? I'm not considering CO2 as part of my correlation,
why are you?

This is an arbitrary and fictitious limit that you have imposed without
sound justification, and therefore I must conclude that your results are
(deliberately?) skewed.
[ . . . ]
DID YOU READ MY POST? I don't think so.

Below are directly observed data for global mean surface
temperature, CO2 concentration, and sunspots for the last
50 years. This is as long as the longest directly
observed record of atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Yes, I read that.

DID YOU READ MY POST? I don't think so either.

I made no mention of CO2. I'm not interested in correlating with CO2 in
this discussion, I AM interested in the correlation between temperature
and sunspots for the time period in question, specifically 1850-2000.

And just so that it is clear this time you ignore it, again.

NOT INTERESTED IN CORRELATING WITH CO2 IN THIS DISCUSSION.