3 ms·
Ah, I didn't see that there was a table. I was eyeballing it and did a pretty bad job. I meant to go up to that peak a bit after the 94 marker. Not the point re
by ajkjk 11y ago
Ah, I didn't see that there was a table. I was eyeballing it and did a pretty bad job. I meant to go up to that peak a bit after the 94 marker. Not the point really, though. The point is that there's a visibly larger difference in the first few years compared to the last one, if we ignore one giant dip in each, which seems as though they're an external effect. But I really don't have a strong stance about the interpretation except to say that 'you can read it in multiple ways depending on how you do it'.
- kevinskii 11y agoThis seems to be quite a change from calling gd1 a crackpot simply because his or her interpretation differs from yours.
- ajkjk 11y agoI never did that. I called him a crackpot because his defense of his opinion was insisting that it was true, switching datasets, and avoiding challenges. Those are crackpot behaviors. I invited him to do a better job defending his point. Haven't I explained that enough times by now?