Sentences with phrase «statistically flat trend»

So since 1998 (or 2005, depending on whether you think the Hadley data or the GISS data are more accurate), the three major surface station datasets all show a statistically flat trend or slower warming (ie the linear trend has a positive slope, but the trend is slow enough that it'll take decades for it to become statistically valid to a 63 % confidence level, never mind 90 % or 95 %), but no cooling.

Not exact matches

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/crutem4vgl/from:1995/to:2013/plot/crutem4vgl/from:1995/to:2013/trend --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Set the starting point at 2002 to 2013 the trend is statistically flat.

Analysis of the satellite data shows a statistically significant cooling trend for the past 12 to 13 years, with it not being possible to reject a flat trend (0 slope) for between 16 and 22 years.

If the interval is long enough (where «enough» could be variously defined, but could be cited for example as 17 years), one can begin to get to good idea, statistically, as to whether we are seeing a rising, falling, or flat trend for that interval.

It is possible for the «true trend», as estimated statistically, to be flat because of the composite phenomena operating over the specified interval, even though the longer trend is positive (for the last century) or negative (during certain paleoclimatologic intervals).

Within the space afforded by using two times the standard error you will be able to draw trend lines that are indistinguishable from previous recent decades, and they will be as «valid» as the «statistically flat» trend Dr. Whitehouse assures us is in this data.

For example, it's not statistically valid for me to claim that there's significant warming in the 1998 - 2009 monthly data I show above because the R2 (representing how noisy the data is compared to the linear trend in time) is too low to draw any valid conclusions beyond «it's effectively flat.»

Now I realize that according to Ben Santer a trend (even a flat one) only becomes «statistically significant» after 17 years.

A flat line with slope of 0 containing a million data points satisfies your criterion of «non statistically significant trend over a period long enough for the statistical power of the test to be 95 %» but I can't see how it's relevant to the discussion.