3 ms·

Your last sentence is false. The difference is one of probability. There’s a much greater chance being correct with the climate change attribution over the ot

by sykh 8y ago

Your last sentence is false. The difference is one of probability. There’s a much greater chance being correct with the climate change attribution over the other one. We have to make conclusions and policies based on evidence and what is likely the cause rather than waiting for a formal proof. The most likely cause of the increase in anomalous weather events is due to the increase in energy in the system. It’s worth pointing this out when these events occur.

krona 8y ago
There’s a much greater chance being correct with the climate change attribution over the other one. Isn't the null hypothesis that there is nothing specific to attribute the rain? Regardless, what's your statistical test and confidence interval?
- sykh 8y ago
  Do you create a statistical test and confidence interval for all of the things you believe to be true? I doubt it. Do you have expertise in all areas? I don’t. I rely on experts. Experts tell me that there is climate change. They tell me that there has been a massive increase in energy in weather system due to human activity. They tell me that the number of anomalies is increasing. Now I encounter a story about a very strange weather occurrence and your question to me is what statistical test I’ve run? I don’t know you and I can only guess as to the purpose of your question. I’m very skeptical that you can answer your own question when it comes to making conclusions about things outside your expertise. So it seems your purpose is lacking in genuineness. If it is news to you that people make conclusions based on the evidence they know about and weigh the possibilities and rough probabilities without conducting a formal statistical analysis then I highly recommend that you do some soul searching.
- sykh 8y ago
  Isn't the null hypothesis that there is nothing specific to attribute the rain? The person I responded to said that attributing this anomalous weather event to climate change was no different than claims that a cool summer disprove climate change. My claim is that attribution of anomalous weather events to climate change have a higher probability of being true than claims that a cool summer disproves climate change. Neither claim is provable but one is more likely to be true than the other. The claims are different in terms of probability of being true.

by sykh 8y ago

krona 8y ago

There’s a much greater chance being correct with the climate change attribution over the other one. Isn't the null hypothesis that there is nothing specific to attribute the rain? Regardless, what's your statistical test and confidence interval?

sykh 8y ago
Do you create a statistical test and confidence interval for all of the things you believe to be true? I doubt it. Do you have expertise in all areas? I don’t. I rely on experts. Experts tell me that there is climate change. They tell me that there has been a massive increase in energy in weather system due to human activity. They tell me that the number of anomalies is increasing. Now I encounter a story about a very strange weather occurrence and your question to me is what statistical test I’ve run? I don’t know you and I can only guess as to the purpose of your question. I’m very skeptical that you can answer your own question when it comes to making conclusions about things outside your expertise. So it seems your purpose is lacking in genuineness. If it is news to you that people make conclusions based on the evidence they know about and weigh the possibilities and rough probabilities without conducting a formal statistical analysis then I highly recommend that you do some soul searching.
sykh 8y ago
Isn't the null hypothesis that there is nothing specific to attribute the rain? The person I responded to said that attributing this anomalous weather event to climate change was no different than claims that a cool summer disprove climate change. My claim is that attribution of anomalous weather events to climate change have a higher probability of being true than claims that a cool summer disproves climate change. Neither claim is provable but one is more likely to be true than the other. The claims are different in terms of probability of being true.