I am confused. Why would anyone with Bachelors, Masters, and working on a Doctorate point anyone to something titled:
http://gustofhotair.blogspot.com when referring to serious science? The incongruity is staggering.
But in spite of that I did actually read the blog. And what I read is, to be quite frank, impossible to take seriously. You have not done the one thing that science students are taught is always required. You have drawn a conclusion at odds with prior art and have not, or more likely can not, explain why that prior work is incorrect. That flaw alone is fatal.
You wrote:
"Data is taken from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (ABM)"
What data? The above statement is meaningless. Impressive, perhaps, to the layperson but meaningless.
"From these averages we calculated the deviations from the mean for every month of every year for each station."
but you also write:
"These were then summed to get the average deviation from the mean for every station for every year."
Do you really think these statements have meaning?
Would any statistician accept either of these two much less be able to decipher the obvious discrepancy? Worst yet you don't even use common statistical terms properly.
And, if you cleared up the obvious contradictions, why is this methodology valid? Is this the methodology used in papers published in peer reviewed journals and accepted by the community of climatologists?
A rhetorical question because we both know it is not. What you did rises to the level of a high school science project not a PhD thesis.
JLowe wrote:
"Unfortunetly all research into Australia's temperatures have solely looked at maximum and minimum temperatures only."
If you really believe that the PhD's who have published peer reviewed papers are that pathetically incapable of doing their job properly you are soon to have a rude awakening.
BTW: Do you remember posting November 15, 2006 10:32 AM at this site as part of this thread the following which I quote:
"thru my PhD in statistical analysis of climate science"
and now you write:
"I am looking forward to my PhD"
and at another site (
http://www.scienceforums.net/showthread.php?t=23336)
you wrote:
"My first 2 years of my Phd were in Mathematical Statistics"
Apparently you don't even know whether you have a PhD or what it is in.
You have contradicted yourself as to your methodology. You have contradicted yourself with respect to your academic accomplishments. You have misstated a basic concept in statistics for which you were corrected by Count Iblis, and your usage of statistical terms (above) is hopelessly elementary.
I am left to seriously question whether anything you have written is true. And I really don't mean to drag this out but:
You claim 9 years of college but never name it ... Why? What college?
