And we have done many validation studies where we compared our diet assessments to biochemical measures, say of, tansfat in the fat tissue of a person or the level of beta - carotene in the blood, and we found
pretty good correlations — not perfect but they are pretty good — and that means that we are able to pick up meaningful differences in people, among people that we can tell someone who is eating a large amount of transfat from a person eating low amount of transfat.
http://people.whitman.edu/~storchkh/clim.pdf It shows
a pretty good correlation of wine quality with temperature on average.
It showed, if I remember correctly, how
a pretty good correlation between calculated and actual global average temperatures could be obtained for the last century using the NASA graphs of various forcings, here: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/RadF.gif
Not exact matches
I think with artificial intelligence and machine learning we're going to discover millions of these
correlations that even as like the great event
correlation humans out there like we're
pretty good, but nowhere near what computers can do.
There's no guarantee this relationship will remain at or near historic lows, although
correlations between stocks and bonds tend to stay low during periods of sluggish growth and low inflation, which
pretty well describes the current economic outlook.
The
correlation between TSI and SSN are
pretty good so I can't see a large error in that parameter.
Note that I consider phrases such as «the
correlation between TSI and SSN are
pretty good so I can't see a large error in that parameter» to be nothing more than handwaving (regardless of what you are referring to as SSN, which is an acronym that escapes me at the moment).
Either way the
correlation is still
pretty good.
The
correlation with temperature through the LIA and other periods is
pretty good and offers a much
better explanation of our continually changing climate than does co2.