Couldn’t the fact that we are standing on 50 gazillion square miles of molten lava possibly have something to do with global warming. Also, could I get one global warming “expert” to stand on the shore and tell me “this is where the elevation of the ocean is supposed to be.” Obviously if they are stating that ocean levels are rising, then they would be able to say if they are receading and base it on a line in the sand. Arguement also goes for glaciers. Exactly how many square miles of glaciers are we supposed to have. Seems it would take a rather large ego.
For nonexperimental data, causal direction can often be inferred if information about time is available. This is because (according to many, though not all, theories) causes must precede their effects temporally. This can be determined by statistical time series models, for instance, or with a statistical test based on the idea of Granger causality , or by direct experimental manipulation. The use of temporal data can permit statistical tests of a pre-existing theory of causal direction. For instance, our degree of confidence in the direction and nature of causality is much greater when supported by cross-correlations , ARIMA models, or cross-spectral analysis using vector time series data than by cross-sectional data .