ROGER COPPOCK explain how this confirms AGW



Plotting a 12 month running average of monthly CO2 against
a 12 month running average of monthly satellite SH temperatures,
I get a correlation factor of less than 0.2 which improves if you
lag the CO2.That is demonstrating that CO2 is influenced by the
temperature not the reverse.
Plotting the the annual change in CO2 in as a 12 month running
average against that of the monthly satellite SH temperatures,
I get a correlation of 0.552 if the CO2 is lagged.
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: How Does this stack up with AGW ?
    ... Plotting a 12 month running average of monthly CO2 against ... a 12 month running average of monthly satellite SH temperatures, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • ROGER COPPOCK explain how this confirms AGW
    ... Plotting a 12 month running average of monthly CO2 against ... a 12 month running average of monthly satellite SH temperatures, ...
    (sci.energy)
  • How Does this stack up with AGW ?
    ... Plotting a 12 month running average of monthly CO2 against ... a 12 month running average of monthly satellite SH temperatures, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: ROGER COPPOCK explain how this confirms AGW
    ... a 12 month running average of monthly satellite SH temperatures, ... Plotting the the annual change in CO2 in as a 12 month running ... I get a correlation of 0.552 if the CO2 is lagged. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: ROGER COPPOCK explain how this confirms AGW
    ... a 12 month running average of monthly satellite SH temperatures, ... Plotting the the annual change in CO2 in as a 12 month running ... I get a correlation of 0.552 if the CO2 is lagged. ...
    (sci.energy)