Tommi Huhtamaki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Correlation is not causation?
>
>
> The correlation is evidence for the greenhouse
> effect theory as the correlation between the mass
> and acceleration of a falling object is evidence
> for the Theory of Gravity.
>
>

No, it isn't. The correlation exists in direction only, not in magnitude. It is not predictable, it is not measurable, and it to date, has not been correctly quantifiable. It could just as easily be a coincidence as a causation... if not easier, since none of the predictability factors have yet been met.

To use my elephant analogy again: If an elephant has one flea on his left side, and two fleas on his right side, and the elephant tends to fling 10% more water/mud on his right side than his left side after 2 weeks of study, do we conclude that the extra flea is the cause? After all, we KNOW fleas can cause irritation in the skin, correct?


Or is the elephant just right-trunked?

Or was the elephant just facing east most of the day (in the northern hemisphere), so his right side had more sun on it?

Or are we just measuring a short-term statistical anomaly?

Or.....



Therein lies the rub, Tommi. The data sampling is SO small, we have no idea what we're measuring here.



Anthony

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.