# Wood For trees graphs (1 Viewer)

#### longview

DP Veteran
What's odd about it? Do you really understand what a trend line shows?

What's odd about it? Do you really understand what a trend line shows?

Next he'll be telling us how the ocean-atmosphere climate system should reach thermal equilibrium within a few miliseconds of any change in forcing :lol:

That's not odd. That's math. Their data is accurate, it's right there on your graph.

The trend in that period was positive. Perhaps you are confused because you picked an outlier to try and flatten the trend, but were defeated by math anyway.

Last edited:
What's odd about it? Do you really understand what a trend line shows?
That's on me, I was thinking of something else, instead of ordinary least squares regression.

does not seem to know the difference between 1999.1 and 1999.10

It uses actual decimals, so there is no difference Make a graph from 1999 to 1999.5, and it shows six points (six months); first at zero, second at about 0.08 (ie, 1/12), third at about 0.16 etc. Bit annoying if you're looking for specific months.

Last edited:
It uses actual decimals. There is no difference Make a graph from 1999 to 1999.5, and it shows six points (six months); first at zero, second at about 0.08 (ie, 1/12), third at about 0.16 etc.
Yea, I realize the odd thing I was seeing was the difference between a base 10 and a base 12 system.
I thought something was off, when a single month change, effected the slope more than it should have.
In reality it was a 10 month change.
The source data is in monthly increments from, for example 1999.1 to 1999.12.
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt

It uses actual decimals, so there is no difference Make a graph from 1999 to 1999.5, and it shows six points (six months); first at zero, second at about 0.08 (ie, 1/12), third at about 0.16 etc. Bit annoying if you're looking for specific months.

Given that it's an attempt to graph temperature trends, looking for specific months usually means you're trying to deceive someone.

Given that it's an attempt to graph temperature trends, looking for specific months usually means you're trying to deceive someone.
Or it could have been I was looking to see what the rapid monthly translation coming out of an El Nino did to the trend.

Or it could have been I was looking to see what the rapid monthly translation coming out of an El Nino did to the trend.

...to prepare to deceive someone ( quite probably yourself).

I swear, Wood for Trees is like fuel for the left sided edge of the Dunning Kruger curve. It's enough information to get you confidence that you can figure out science, but not enough to actually teach it to you.

EDIT: oh, I see. He's probably doing this in response to the 'scientific site' WUWT's latest 'news' that temperatures decline after an El Niño.