3 ms·
IMO it's always interesting to know what's happened in ancient history, but for the purposes of keeping earth habitable for humans, I'm mainly interested in the
by ip26 8y ago
IMO it's always interesting to know what's happened in ancient history, but for the purposes of keeping earth habitable for humans, I'm mainly interested in the period of time in which humans have lived on earth. The rate of change has not been totally unprecedented, but it has been within the time range we've been around.
Superfluous data can distract from salient points; for example it's simply not relevant to the discussion of life on earth what the weather was like when the earth was still a ball of lava. And sure, the temperature changed quite rapidly when the moon was blown off the side of the earth. But how is that important?
- logfromblammo 8y agoI don't find the possibility of distraction to be more important than the possibility of deception. If you conceal data because it is distracting, the person from whom you are hiding it cannot know why you did that. They only know that they cannot see what you refused to show. If it is not relevant, it is better to show it, and explain why it is not relevant as best as you are able. And that explanation can take the form of an arrow that marks the earliest time life was suspected to have first developed. But in showing it, an observer might be able to discern temperature trends due to changes in the sun, meteor and comet bombardments, loss of core radionuclides, radiation into space, or other cosmological factors not attributable to humanity, or other forms of life. It might show a reason why the Earth today should be cooler now than it was at the Eocene maximum. It's just more honest. You can still show a second graphic that cuts out the pieces you feel to be unimportant, and which highlights the pieces that best make your point.