polar bear wrote:

Assuming that the data values are correct, then what does the R^2
value of 0.78 mean. Roger would like you to think that the R^2 value
of 0.78 supports his theory, that CO2 levels cause the change in
temperature. But this is NOT necessarily true. Roger's theory is only
one possibility out of many.

Surely we know how much fossil fuel is being/has been burnt over the period
that the CO2 levels have increased. If the CO2 produced by that burning
matches the observed increased levels, then temperature increases are not
driving CO2 increases.

Alan

Alan Peake wrote:
polar bear wrote:

Assuming that the data values are correct, then what does the R^2
value of 0.78 mean. Roger would like you to think that the R^2 value
of 0.78 supports his theory, that CO2 levels cause the change in
temperature. But this is NOT necessarily true. Roger's theory is only
one possibility out of many.

Surely we know how much fossil fuel is being/has been burnt over the period
that the CO2 levels have increased. If the CO2 produced by that burning
matches the observed increased levels, then temperature increases are not
driving CO2 increases.

Alan


That may have been true before the fires.