Roger Coppock wrote:

On Mar 4, 2:14*am, chemist
wrote:
On Mar 4, 10:02 am, Roger Coppock
wrote:



Today's barely detectable effect is
tomorrow's major phenomena.


http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Slope1952-2007.jpg

On Mar 3, 9:53 pm, "ZNB00"
wrote:
[ . . . ] As a general rule in science, if
[ an effect is barely detectable,

[ . . . ]
Warmest Regards

Bonzo

"CO2 variations show little correlation with
our planet's climate on long, medium and even
short time scales." R. Timothy Patterson,
Professor Of Geology, Director
Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center, Carleton
University, Canada

Sorry, Dr. Patterson, but
R^2=0.78, p-value 2.220e-16 is a major
correlation.

CO2 or Sunspots: Statistical Correlation
Chooses

Statistical correlation is a powerful
technique with very many uses. *It produces
"R squared" a measure of whether two series
of measures trend together.

(Those who are new to statistical correlation
and "R squared" will find a tutorial on the
subject he

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html


http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correla...efficient.html

Item 20 in the above shows R squared for
several graphed relationships.)

When applied to a time series of global mean
surface temperatures and data from
prospective global warming causes covering
the same time period, correlation can help
locate the cause of the observed global
warming. Low "R squared" values, those near
zero, can, by themselves, totally rule out a
prospective cause. High "R squared" values
indicate that a prospective cause is very
likely, but do not, by themselves, 'prove'
something caused the warming. *(Experimental
science rarely 'proves' something like a
mathematical proof does.)

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.

The R^2 value for the correlation of CO2 and
planetary surface temperature is 0.78. *The
simple rising line showing heating for
increasing CO2 explains a lot of the variance
in the global mean temperature. The
relationship between CO2 and global
temperature is very strong and the
anthropogenic greenhouse gas radiative
forcing theory is well supported by these
data.

The R^2 value for sunspots and and planetary
surface temperature is very near zero. *These
data clearly do not support any relationship
between sunspot numbers and global mean
surface temperature over the last 50 years.
It is very unlikely that sunspots have
anything to do with the current global
warming.

This test applies very easily to all other
claims for global warming causes. *It will
quickly separate the wheat from the chaff.

-.-. --.- *Roger Coppock

=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Data =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The global mean surface "Temp"erature data
are the GISS adjusted J-D yearly land and sea
average, available from NASA at:


http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt

The "CO2" data are the yearly averages of the
monthly data from the Keeling curve measured
at Mauna Loa, available at:


ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt

"Sunspots" are the yearly averages of the
monthly means in the NOAA NGDC "MONTHLY"
file. *They are available at the FTP site
accessed through this web page:


http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/SSN/ssn.html

Year Temp *CO2 * *Sunspots
1958 14.08 315.33 184.5917
1959 14.06 315.98 158.75
1960 13.99 316.91 112.275
1961 14.08 317.65 53.8833
1962 14.04 318.46 37.6
1963 14.08 318.99 27.8917
1964 13.79 319.20 10.2
1965 13.89 320.03 15.0583
1966 13.97 321.37 46.875
1967 14.00 322.18 93.6667
1968 13.96 323.05 105.8917
1969 14.08 324.62 105.5583
1970 14.03 325.68 104.6917
1971 13.90 326.32 66.65
1972 14.00 327.46 68.9333
1973 14.14 329.68 38.15
1974 13.92 330.17 34.4083
1975 13.95 331.14 15.4583
1976 13.84 332.06 12.55
1977 14.13 333.78 27.4833
1978 14.02 335.40 92.6583
1979 14.09 336.78 155.275
1980 14.18 338.70 154.65
1981 14.27 340.11 140.45
1982 14.05 340.98 116.2917
1983 14.26 342.84 66.6333
1984 14.09 344.20 45.85
1985 14.06 345.87 17.9417
1986 14.13 347.19 13.4
1987 14.27 348.98 29.225
1988 14.31 351.45 100
1989 14.19 352.89 157.7917
1990 14.38 354.16 142.2917
1991 14.35 355.48 145.775
1992 14.12 356.27 94.4833
1993 14.14 356.96 54.7333
1994 14.24 358.63 29.8667
1995 14.38 360.63 17.5
1996 14.30 362.37 8.625
1997 14.40 363.47 21.4833
1998 14.57 366.50 64.2083
1999 14.33 368.14 93.175
2000 14.33 369.41 119.5333
2001 14.48 371.07 110.925
2002 14.56 373.16 104.0917
2003 14.55 375.80 63.5667
2004 14.49 377.55 40.4417
2005 14.62 379.75 29.7833
2006 14.54 381.85 15.1833
2007 14.57 383.72 7.5417

=-=-=-=-=-=-= "R" Program Outputs
=-=-=-=-=-=-= The following are outputs of
the "R" statistical program: For information
on "R," please see:

http://www.r-project.org/

--------

Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ CO2, data = aframe)

Residuals:
Min * * * * 1Q * * Median * * * * 3Q * * *
Max -0.2316612 -0.0805322 *0.0185249
0.0763159 *0.1798386

Coefficients:
Estimate *Std. Error t value * Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) 1.10008e+01 2.41721e-01 45.5103
2.22e-16 *** CO2 * * * * 9.24797e-03
7.01018e-04 13.1922 2.22e-16 *** ---
Signif. codes: *0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*'
0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1

Residual standard error: 0.101321 on 48
degrees of freedom Multiple R-Squared:
0.783817, * Adjusted R-squared: 0.779313
F-statistic: 174.034 on 1 and 48 DF,
p-value: 2.220e-16

--------

Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ Sunspots, data = aframe)

Residuals:
Min * * * * 1Q * * Median * * * * 3Q * * *
Max -0.3909495 -0.1523184 -0.0514594
0.1445919 *0.4380756

Coefficients:
Estimate *Std. Error * t value Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) 1.41804e+01 5.39054e-02 263.06149
* 2e-16 *** Sunspots * *4.97803e-05
6.18766e-04 * 0.08045 *0.93621 ---
Signif. codes: *0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*'
0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1

Residual standard error: 0.217902 on 48
degrees of freedom Multiple R-Squared:
0.000134823, * * * *Adjusted R-squared:
-0.0206957 F-statistic: 0.00647235 on 1 and
48 DF, *p-value: 0.936213

The general trend of the the last 6 months of
the MSU LT temperature indicates that
February's anomaly will be 1 degree C below the
long term average. If it is then Rogers
analysis is just a load of doo-doo

Nope, half a year does not make or break a
climate trend.

Roger still thinks temperature == Climate.

Roger still thinks his made made criteria of 30
years is the time period needed to define climate
instead of time between ice ages.