If you are a government or academic climate scientist, you can (and will) use a variant of this trend line for graphing any and all climate phenomena.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Climate Grifting Shutting Down
- Fundamental Pillars Of Democracy
- An Inconvenient Truth
- Antarctic Meltdown Update
- “Trump eyes major cuts to NOAA research”
- Data Made Simple II – Sneak Preview
- Attacks On Democracy
- Scientists Warn
- Upping The Ante
- Our New Leadership
- Grok Defines Fake News
- Arctic Meltdown Update
- The Savior Of Humanity
- President Trump Explains The Stock Market
- Net Zero In Europe
- The Canadian Hockey Stick
- Dogs Cause Hurricanes, Tornadoes And Droughts
- 50 Years Of Climate Devastation
- Climate Cycles
- Hiding The Decline
- Careful Research At BBC News
- New Video : Man Made Climate Emergency
- Geoengineering To Save The Planet
- Geoengineering Genocide
Recent Comments
- Mike Peinsipp on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- arn on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- arn on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Mac on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- mwhite on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Denis Rushworth on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- arn on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- D. Boss on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- gordon vigurs on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Independent on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
Looks like you cherry picked your end points – the actual trend over the last 1.5 cycles is up.
Or maybe 1.25 cycles.
Their trend lines have direct correlation to funding levels.
Surely, that’s the Arctic ice trend line; the grant income trend line and the temperature trend line go the other way.
They usually use the 270° to 90° (4π/3 to π/2) trend with sine functions but a good hockey stick really needs to curve fit the tangent function of 270° to 90°… kind of like NOAA’s “adjustment” trendline.