/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14547480
>no error bars
into the trash it goes

>>14498671
You yourself said the time-axis was stretched in one region, and not stretched in another region. That's de facto a nonlinear graph.
>>What do you call that white break in the data?
>That's called an axis break.
No. The axis break exists on the axis. I'm talking about the gap where data is not reported. Either the data doesn't exist (doubtful), or the data isn't included (omitted). It's data that is omitted.
>There's no data there because there's no axis underneath it. But there's literally no data omitted
What kind of retard are you? If you're selectively not showing data that exists, that means per definition you've omitted the data.
>>Factoring in the stretched time, you get that the 750-0 years is stretched by about a factor of 5
>Wrong.
Track the pixels of the time axes. Here, I'll go first.
>20,000 occurs at about (365,950)
>18,000 occurs at about (470, 950)
This means about 100 pixels corresponds to 2,000 years.
>750 occurs at about (1440,950)
>250 occurs at about (1565,950)
So about 100 pixels corresponds to about 500 years.

The actual stretching is about a factor of 4. How is this wrong?
> Interglacial warming was 6 degrees over 7500 years.
Does not follow from the graph we've been discussing.
>Current warming rate is 0.2 degrees per decade.
Does not follow from the graph we've been discussing. I even drew the slopes for you.