If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Brian Sandle wrote in message ...
Eric Hocking wrote: [...] I have, in spite of your diversion attempts, tried (and I believe succeeded) in showing that the crop circle proponent's arguments that FMD (pedestrian) restrictions had no impact on circle building in 2001 in the UK is unsupportable. What can be concluded from that is up to those that have been lurking. I thought river flows might give some indication of weather. Only of rainfall in the catchment area, surely? While *you* might think river flow gives some indication of weather, you have not shown it to be so. The rest of your calculations, while interesting, do not show anything of the sort. Why not just check the monthly weather figures from the Government Meteorological Bureau? http://www.met-office.gov.uk/climate/uk/ Monthly numbers are available to 1998, but your best bet is from 1999 as the data is tabulated. http://www.nwl.ac.uk/ih/nrfa/monthly...2/07/rv00.html gives the flows of a number of UK rivers but unfortunately only from 1999 to 2002. I have tried to estimate the flows from the logarithmic scales on the diagram for the Itchen river which flows in Hampshire and might give some indication for the weather situation in Wiltshire/Hampshire area. If as you say you work with govt info maybe you know of a better source. You really do read a lot into other people's posts don't you? I didn't say I "work with govt info" - other than the references I've provided in this thread. And the crop circles I have taken from http://www.cropcircleresearch.com/ar...tribution.html Whoa, whoa, whoa. You've jumped from *thinking* that river flow *may* correlate to weather (uh, what about sunshine and temperature, especially wrt crops?) straight to *proving* a correlation between river flow to crop circle emergence and FMD? Try showing the logic of this before attempting to force the numbers. Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 Mar+Ap+May flow 18 24 35 22 Apr+May circs 24 14 9 4 Mar+Ap flow 13 15 25 15 Apr circs 9 3 0 1 FMD Yes(1)/No(0)0 0 1 0 " This amount of data is not really sufficient, but it is interesting what turns up is a -0.49 correlation between Itchen river Mar Apr May flows and Apr+May crop circles {call it r(flows-circles)}. I am risking using the Pearson correlation. And the Mar+Apr flows and the Apr circles correlation is -0.67. You're risking more than choosing the correct correlation technique. You've yet to show that the Itchen River flow has any relationship to weather conditions. As for river flow, have you factored in seasonal abstraction from river systems? Also there turns up a correlation of river flow to FMD Jan Feb Mar Apr May 0.94 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.68 May being when it was finished there? This "correlation" implies what? River flow affects government decisions on lifting FMD restrictions? But anyway taking the Mar Apr May flows figures, since weather might stop hoaxers, You are yet to show that the Itchen River flow readings actually has any reflection on the weather pattern trends. r(flows-fmd) = 0.94. And is there a correlation between FMD & circles? Yes, r(fmd-circles) = -0.29, a small negative correlation, rather less than from above r(flows-circles) = -0.49. Then what happens when partial correlation is used to get a feel for removing affects of the factors? When the effects of the rivers are nullified then FMD becomes *positively* related to circles. r(fmd-circles.flows) = 0.57 instead of -0.29 and for completeness r(flows-fmd.circles) = 0.96 instead of 0.94, no change, rather indicating circles not causative, r(flows-circles.fmd) = -0.66 instead of -0.49, not much change indicating FMD not really causative. With that small amount of data, so far, some of that could be by chance. And also shows that you can "prove" anything with forced numbers and illogical connections. You need first to show that there is a logical connection between a single river's flow trend as an indicator of weather conditions (rainfall, temperature, sunshine). How about using *weather* data directly for the county, instead of attempting to derive this data from a single river monitoring station? -- Eric Hocking |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|