Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 9
th, 2017 at 7:18pm:
So you have no idea how to test for natural variation. You have no idea of statistics or climate.
So it is just a way for you to avoid admitting that AGW is real.
So worked out a framework of how “natural variability” can be tested, Desperate Lees?
Natural variability implies==> over to you Desperate Lees.
So the alternate hypothesis:
H1: is what, Desperate Lees? To test H1 we derive the null hypothesis
H0: is what, Desperate Lees? It needs to be a mathematical relationship that can be tested statistically.
You have been pushing “Natural Variability” for ages, Desperate Lees, often saying, wrongly, that Natural Variability is the “null hypothesis.”
So—got anything yet or is “natural variability” just a way you can avoid admitting to yourself that the climate is warming? I suspect that is the case.
Some considerations: what drives the NV? What period is it? Any sort of equation that could show the NV? Or is it all just bullshit?