[subject4056]

You ought to begin by getting really good citations on each of those figures. If you or the source you got them from had any confusion about how to arrive at those numbers, any results you get from them will likely be meaningless.

Hopefully in doing so you will start to notice the missing pieces of info and can ask more targeted questions to get better results.

[DoreenMichele]

I'm a woman

Rest assured, everything I do is somehow "wrong", even if I did exactly what some guy did.

But thank you for playing.

My last Ask HN got zero replies.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37490215

[PaulHoule]

Huh? I took a class on geoengineering taught by a woman who'd done work on ocean iron fertilization and a man who'd done work on sulfate aerosol injection.

Also the average "Ask HN" gets zero replies. I tend to "lean in" and answer a lot of them but that might say something more negative than positive about be but you can tell I am karma motivated by my score and I think I deserve more upvotes for this than I get.

I'll add to the other person's comment in that you probably won't find just one input for your figures but you'll find many of them.

You might find one paper that says that an acre of wetland holds 10 tons of CO2 and another that says it holds 15 tons of CO2. (I just made those numbers up)

In fact it probably depends on the wetland and if you spent a lot of time looking at papers you might find 20-30 numbers. All this is fine because this reflects real uncertainty and you're either going to say "the average is 12 tons with a standard deviation of 3 tons" or you're going to repeat your analysis with a wide range of inputs to do your sensitivity analysis that way.

----

My take is that soil carbon is like "dark matter" in that it is really mysterious. If anything is fraught it is soil carbon because Bayer sure wishes farmers quit plowing to control weeds and just spraying a lot of glyphosate everywhere which might be good for the carbon balance but the glyphosate almost certainly has unwanted side effects.

[DoreenMichele]

You also use UFO to mean aliens:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37629528

(Insert joke about how you wouldn't do that if you actually respected me.)

FYI, I'm an environmental studies major. I'm aware that in the real world, figures vary. A lot.

There are lots of smart people on HN. I'm hoping to not have to reinvent the wheel. At least not too much.

If anyone can point me to some formulas that already exist for what gets used to calculate climate change targets, I would appreciate it. I'm excited to learn that wetlands loss potentially accounts for a substantial part of the problem and is largely overlooked.

I would like to begin running some numbers on this dreary Saturday rather than just stick with "It's a whole lot!"

[PaulHoule]

Not so sure what meaning of UFO you have other than "Unidentified Flying Object" which I am used to describe "intelligent aliens who have a physical presence on or near Earth" (don't believe in them) vs. "intelligent aliens who live somewhere else" (do believe in them)

Of course Jacques Valee thought it was more likely they were time or dimension travelers

https://www.amazon.com/Messengers-Deception-UFO-Contacts-Cul...

[ssss11]

The parent’s response was completely grounded in logic and was reasonable. That has nothing to do with gender. They didn’t deserve that response.

Your topic and hypothesis sound interesting - best of luck working through the problem.