In Reply to: Man, you are quick with your data - you just make it on the fly, as you go posted by Victor Khomenko on January 18, 2007 at 12:45:07:
Unfortunately, I can't. It's just a piece of a press release. I'm not using it to argue for GW on its own - as you point out, it's pretty thin scientific gruel. That's why I said it was "suggestive, not conclusive".
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Your objections would hold more water if I were using this map as evidence of GW. - GliderGuider 01/18/0712:56:12 01/18/07 (9)
- The funny thing is - it very well might be the evidence of GW... BUT... not the proof of YOUR MODEL - Victor Khomenko 13:04:04 01/18/07 (8)
- How do you determine if they overemphasize the human effect? - GliderGuider 13:35:10 01/18/07 (7)
- He-he... I believe I do - Victor Khomenko 14:06:13 01/18/07 (6)
- Could you point me to one of those "noise level" estimates? - GliderGuider 14:21:56 01/18/07 (5)
- Look through the archives - they have been posted here many times before - Victor Khomenko 14:40:46 01/18/07 (4)
- You're right, I was just fucking around. - GliderGuider 16:41:01 01/18/07 (3)
- Same here... - Victor Khomenko 16:54:00 01/18/07 (2)
- You'll have to wait, I'm afraid - GliderGuider 16:58:55 01/18/07 (1)
- OK, I'll consider voting for a dem, then... - Victor Khomenko 17:07:26 01/18/07 (0)