tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1579705626818354150.post7122168704408282391..comments2023-09-28T05:56:51.582-04:00Comments on Titanic Deck Chairs: Some Earth Day AmmoC. Augusthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05860759500684485756noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1579705626818354150.post-21034714268054169412008-04-21T17:17:00.000-04:002008-04-21T17:17:00.000-04:00My understanding is that the book by Avery and Sin...My understanding is that the book by Avery and Singer does just what you ask. I haven't read the book, but have read a number of reviews of it, and they lead me to believe that the assertions in the brief "Climate Change 101" post on CapMag are fleshed out in the larger work.<BR/><BR/>Thus, my interpretation of the CapMag piece was that it was a distillation, and as such, footnotes or extensive C. Augusthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05860759500684485756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1579705626818354150.post-49686801523925177492008-04-21T16:42:00.000-04:002008-04-21T16:42:00.000-04:00Avery: "There is a 95 percent correlation between ...Avery: "There is a 95 percent correlation between Earth’s temperatures and sunspots since 1860."<BR/><BR/>Let's take this as an example assertion by Avery. One of the first questions that arises for me is: Where is the proof?<BR/><BR/>Another question is: Given the correlation, what is the causal connection? (Correlation is not causation.) As an aside, if Avery is sure of his science, then Burgess Laughlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13865479709475171678noreply@blogger.com