This could become a series. Previously in here, I have highlighted the way the Climate Sceptics Party and their official blogger Geoffrey Brown have shown hypocrisy in claiming peer review is corrupt yet when getting a sniff of a peer-reviewed paper that they think supports their idiotic position, they shout it from the rooftops and peer review is suddenly king. Well today, I thought I would highlight just how contradictory these idiots are. This time, it is with the generalisation that correlation does not equal causation.
Here is what Geoffrey and the CSP think about attributing causation to correlation.
So, apparently it is delusional to claim correlation equals causation, no matter how convincing. Ok. I get the point Geoffrey. We better not do that then. So…….why is it important to you that Ole Humlum, geographer extraordinaire and science advisor to a dodgy outfit of misfits called the International Climate Science Coalition, found NO correlation in his graph (with the dodgy trend lines) comparing CO2 to temperature?
What is it you said? Let’s see…..
Although the atmospheric Carbon dioxide is ever rising, the temperature from data from Hadley CRU (HadCRUT4) shows a falling trend fron 1957 to 1977, a rising trend from 1977 to 2003 and falling from 2003 to March 2013. See any correlation?
Very interesting. Are you perhaps suggesting that because there is no apparent correlation in the dodgy graph between CO2 and temperature that CO2 is not the cause? Now I’m confused. Perhaps some more statements you’ve made about correlation and causation will help…
Ohhhhhh I get it now. Correlation DOES NOT equal causation but no correlation DOES equal no causation when the argument when the dodgy graph suits your nutty position….. Got it.