Statistical analysis of tree rings

I'm just now coming up to speed on this topic. Here's that link to the data table, but I can't see how you know they're for bristle cone pines: At the same website is a text file describing the analysis method and the file formats: Apparently you cannot just take the raw numbers and get valid results: It doesn't appear that Daniel made any attempt to apply this correction, but looking at the raw data I confess I can't see much correlation just by looking. If I were given the raw data but without the decades in the second column I doubt I could figure out they were describing the same years.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

Check out Message 14. It's a reply to me, but I think it was intended for you.Why does he think a moving average is helpful? It seems like that would remove the detail necessary for finding correlations.--Percy

Could be. He seems to like playing with numbers willy-nilly, sort of like numerology applied to tree ring widths.--Percy

Daniel,It might be hard to tell, but we're actually delighted that you're interested in analyzing the raw data. But it has to be a rational analysis, and you can't keep interjecting unsupported conclusions without losing all pretense of objectivity.Developing your own analysis techniques from scratch isn't likely to bear fruit, but if you want to continue trying then we'll continue giving you feedback about whether you seem to be doing anything meaningful.But you might be better off seeking flaws in existing analysis approaches. For instance, you could use the tree ring specialists own analysis software and seek contradictions, such as sequences of known date that correlate with tree ring sequences of other known, but different, dates. Or perhaps you could show that they're too lenient in the degree of correlation they seek.--Percy