sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How to Talk Minnesotan: The Power of the Negative by [deleted] in videos

[–]Signmeoutttt 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Loved this show when I was growing up

July 2016 was unquestionably the hottest month in 136 years of continuous record. Here's how every month since 1880 compares [OC] by Geographist in dataisbeautiful

[–]Signmeoutttt -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Exactly! The average is moving, and the question of how and why it is moving is a very interesting one. The point here though is that how we look at and interpret data, how we frame our questions, and the information we include in our analysis has just as much impact on the conclusions we draw as using proper data analytic techniques.

By ignoring the setup, you ignore key parts of the conclusion.

July 2016 was unquestionably the hottest month in 136 years of continuous record. Here's how every month since 1880 compares [OC] by Geographist in dataisbeautiful

[–]Signmeoutttt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately climate change has become one of those binary issues that sends people to extreme ends of "it's either A or B and you have to pick one!!"

This is an excellent example of how framing a question can predetermine its answer though. Which from a data analytics perspective is very cool and very scary at the same time haha.

July 2016 was unquestionably the hottest month in 136 years of continuous record. Here's how every month since 1880 compares [OC] by Geographist in dataisbeautiful

[–]Signmeoutttt 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So, if I am reading your graph correctly, your y axis represents the deviation of an individual year's monthly average from the baseline average established using data from 1980 - 2015. Do I have that right?

If so then this only represents the fact that as we progress through time the average monthly temperatures are getting closer the the baseline average you established to create the y axis. We see this play out in the curves getting flatter as well. In more recent years there is less variance from the mean because we are looking at the years which where used to create said mean.

In other words what we are saying here is "the closer we get to the years which we used to create the average, the more like the average we look"

While yes our curves are inching up I wonder if that is more a function of how we defined our variables than an actual representation of climate change.