4 ms·

Great. More 'ammo' for climate change deniers to take out of context and spread around. Most folks would not bother with trying to understand the points this a

Great. More 'ammo' for climate change deniers to take out of context and spread around. Most folks would not bother with trying to understand the points this article is making when presented with the 'no change here' graph. HN readers are not 'most folks' so this type of data manipulation is obvious and wrong to many here.

mmastrac 8y ago
I wouldn't say that - he's basically reverse engineered the graph that a climate change denier is already using for evidence and shown how it's basically cherry-picked BS. Clearly the denialists are already well-versed with this particular approach.
- seiferteric 8y ago
  I don't even believe that people that produce such graphs are real deniers. I think there is a lot of money to be made by for people like this and they are in the "climate denier industry". Someone going out of their way to produce a graph like that must know what they are doing and have ulterior motives.
Jtsummers 8y ago
Well, the ammo was already out there (last graph). The nice thing about this is that it's ammo for the rest of us (it explains that last graph and where it came from). This is one of the problems in debating people with counterfactual beliefs. They'll start with false assumptions, but often everything after those assumptions are reasonably sound applications of logic and math. They may not even know what those assumptions are (as in the case of the flawed, final graph). They see a trend line that confirms their belief. The flawed assumption is that the data used to produce the trend line is itself sound and reasonable. Knowing where the data came from, why it's problematic, you can present counter evidence to their false beliefs.
rdtsc 8y ago
Isn't this doing the opposite by showing how one can play tricks with various time windows and such. The exact kind of stuff deniers would do to "prove" their point.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  Right, my point being that most folks would not bother with trying to understand the points this article is making, and instead take the graph showing 'nothing to see here' and run with it.
  - rdtsc 8y ago
    Ah, I see the point. In that respect it would have been better if they had illustrated the trick with a hypothetical widgets produced by a factory scenario than jump straight into climate change.

mmastrac 8y ago

I wouldn't say that - he's basically reverse engineered the graph that a climate change denier is already using for evidence and shown how it's basically cherry-picked BS. Clearly the denialists are already well-versed with this particular approach.

seiferteric 8y ago
I don't even believe that people that produce such graphs are real deniers. I think there is a lot of money to be made by for people like this and they are in the "climate denier industry". Someone going out of their way to produce a graph like that must know what they are doing and have ulterior motives.

Jtsummers 8y ago

Well, the ammo was already out there (last graph). The nice thing about this is that it's ammo for the rest of us (it explains that last graph and where it came from). This is one of the problems in debating people with counterfactual beliefs. They'll start with false assumptions, but often everything after those assumptions are reasonably sound applications of logic and math. They may not even know what those assumptions are (as in the case of the flawed, final graph). They see a trend line that confirms their belief. The flawed assumption is that the data used to produce the trend line is itself sound and reasonable. Knowing where the data came from, why it's problematic, you can present counter evidence to their false beliefs.

rdtsc 8y ago

Isn't this doing the opposite by showing how one can play tricks with various time windows and such. The exact kind of stuff deniers would do to "prove" their point.

craftyguy 8y ago
Right, my point being that most folks would not bother with trying to understand the points this article is making, and instead take the graph showing 'nothing to see here' and run with it.
- rdtsc 8y ago
  Ah, I see the point. In that respect it would have been better if they had illustrated the trick with a hypothetical widgets produced by a factory scenario than jump straight into climate change.