"Dawlish" wrote in message
...
On Sep 22, 5:36 pm, Natsman wrote:
On 22 Sep, 11:46, Dawlish wrote:





On Sep 22, 10:03 am, John Dann wrote:

On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 01:11:10 -0700 (PDT), Dawlish
wrote:

I doubt whether it is more
than 1SD away from the mean and it is certainly not 2SD, which would
include 95% of the population (in this case all the measurements of
Antarctic Sea ice area from the graph) and would be regarded as
statistically significant.

The only slight caveat to that is the usual one of knowing/estimating
what the underlying distribution of the population might be. Perhaps
it might be at least tolerably close to a normal distribution, but
maybe someone has done some checks.

Yes, agreed.

Personally, I was always somehow more comfortable with non-parametric
stats for this sort of study - again I imagine that someone might have
used non-parametric methods to look at eg ice data - but I really
can't remember too much about how to apply such methods.

Me too. I did love the stats lectures at Reading.....................

Whichever way you look at it, it looks as if there is more ice than
there has been, both in the Arctic, and in Antarctica. Not a lot, I
grant you, but it is on the increase. So I wonder how long the AGW
lobby will continue to howl that "the ice is melting and we're all
doomed"? A slight increase in temperature or a reduction in sea ice,
and the AGW alarmists would say "told you so", but a slight change in
the other direction and it's just a "blip" or of no consequence. I
think on balance it's going to get cooler, and I'm not alone in that
belief.

CK- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, I agree you are not alone Natsman, but the scientists who agree
with you are in a tiny minority and nobody that counts is listening to
them.

Why not read the explanations of trends and deviations from the mean
that I've given on this thread. If you understood what they show,
you'd then realise why I say what I do about Arctic ice being in a
continuing downward trend. Increases, or decreases, in Antarctic ice,
especially in winter, mean very little, if you are trying use this to
make a case for global cooling, like Lawrence, you are barking up the
wrong tree.


You do make me laugh Paul, why even the warmist are conceding (due to
reality sinking the models) that we are heading for a cooling period with of
course AGW to return in earnest 10-16 years down the line.

What ever next , deferred warming?