An interesting graph showing solar cycle, El Niño, and surface temperature correlation in Australia

Ian H. Bryce writes at Jo Nova’s website:

The thing that intrigued me about the maximum temperatures is the high peaks, which occur at the peak of the odd solar cycles, and four other times, when we had strong El Nino events. (Most recently, three in four years) It is interesting to note that we did not have the Super EL Nino in 1998!

One wonders when our climate scientists graph global mean temperatures for tens of thousands of stations worldwide, that they “miss the wood for the trees.” I contacted the BOM some time ago about this phenomenon, but I have not had a reply yet. (Surprising?)

Read the entire fascinating article at Jo Nova’s website.

UPDATE: Willis finds some serious problems and posts in comments:

Willis Eschenbach says:

Not sure why I usually end up being the one to rain on the parade, but I’ve accepted my lot in life. Here is the Echuca data plotted against the peaks of the solar cycles, as measured by sunspot counts.

echuca_aerodrome_max_temperatures_1882_2011

A couple things of note. First, he has misidentified the Cycle 11 peak, it happens earlier. Second, he is very vague about the timing of the cycles. Yes, the high years occurred during those cycles, but if we look at the actual peak year of each cycle, some happen two years before the peak temperatures, some three years before, some four years before, and some show no relation at all to the peak temperatures.

Sorry … but that’s the real data, and the sunspot/temperature correlation doesn’t hold up in the slightest.

SOURCES:

Sunspots

Temperature

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Clearly something is wrong with that graph. It doesn’t trend upward with a violent uptick post 1980.

Luther Wu

I heard them on TV- several times, different stations- the scientists were all saying that the sun doesn’t have anything to do with our Climate Change problems, that it’s all because of the CO2 from the industrialized free world. and that we have to shut down outr industry and do it now, while there’s still a chance.
I’m supposed to believe some lady with a blog over MSNBC and CNN?

Pamela Gray

This may be an artifact related to spurious correlation expected to occur when there are thousands of stations to look at. It can also be expected to occur when two disconnected oscillations occasionally coincide, much like the windshield wipers do on the bus when controlled by separate motors. These coincidental correlations can stay together for many decades, depending on the oscillation of each, but may not at all be connected to the same motor.

Vincent

Seems that there is a correlation of peaks to odd number cycles.
That is not surprising. The sunspot cycles flip polarity of the magnetic fields alternately, so it looks to me as though the underlying cycle is actually around 22 years.
What we observe as the 11 year cycle is an artiface of the existence, or not, of sunspots. There is no way of expressing a “negative” sunspot number, so they all become positive. The cycle clearly has a positive and a negative half and the temperature peaks correlate to one side.
I wonder what the underlying mechanism is.

Randall Harris

Does the Northern Hemisphere respond to the even numbered sunspot cycles? 😉

AnonyMoose

I think I’ve seen previous work about possible linkage between the Earth’s and Sun’s magnetic fields, and there are ways in which the even/odd cycles may be relevant. The two magnetic fields are in similar alignments during every other cycle — but the Sun’s magnetic fields are rather peculiar.

aaron

I’m curious to see the atmospheric temperature before, during, and after each.
Did the global temp increase similar to 1998? How much of the heat stuck?

Echuca is a good example of a continuous temperature record from 1881 until the present, in a town which has experienced absolutely no UHI effect. In 1881 Echuca was probably about the same size and density as it is today. This strongly suggests that the typical industrial era increase in average temperature seen in most cities temperature record`is an artefact of increasing size, density and energy use of the city.

aaron

I’ve expected for a long time that both solar polarity and intensity may be a factor in warming.
Of course, correlation doesn’t mean causation. Perhaps changes in high energy cosmic rays affect some of the dynamics in the sun too.

Willis Eschenbach

Not sure why I usually end up being the one to rain on the parade, but I’ve accepted my lot in life. Here is the Echuca data plotted against the peaks of the solar cycles, as measured by sunspot counts.

A couple things of note. First, he has misidentified the Cycle 11 peak, it happens earlier. Second, he is very vague about the timing of the cycles. Yes, the high years occurred during those cycles, but if we look at the actual peak year of each cycle, some happen two years before the peak temperatures, some three years before, some four years before, one is four years after, and some show no relation at all to the peak temperatures.
Sorry … but that’s the real data, and the sunspot/temperature correlation doesn’t hold up in the slightest.
SOURCES:
Sunspots
Temperature

What could be interesting is what will happen with SC 25. L&P have forecast a maximum Wolf number of 7.

Billy Liar

I’m with Willis:
The sunspot cycle peaks do not match up. The first two cycles 11/13 are >7 years out, the later ones 2-3 years.
Someone is making stuff up.

braddles

I’m impressed that Echuca had an aerodrome in 1881, more than 20 years before the first aeroplane was invented. Now that’s forward thinking for you. Perhaps the attitude was “Build it and they will come”

wayne

What we observe as the 11 year cycle is an artiface of the existence, or not, of sunspots. There is no way of expressing a “negative” sunspot number, so they all become positive. The cycle clearly has a positive and a negative half and the temperature peaks correlate to one side.
That would be an interesting plot, reversing to negative the even cycle counts. Shouldn’t be too hard either, the hardest part being to decide what is the proper date when each cycle begins and ends.

(repeating a comment made at Jo Nova’s) Using the KNMI temperature data, looking at Irkutsk in Siberia, you get a marked 11 year cycle through the 1800’s. Doesnt show in most of the 1900’s. William Connelly made same comment as Willis Eschenbach. Might be a coincidence. Irkutsk is remarkable in its nearness to a giant freshwater lake (Baikal) Not so for Echuca.

I have also noticed some passing resemblance between the ENSO and changes in the geomagnetic field, possibly just coincidence:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/ENSO-dB.htm

Willis I appreciate your sharp eye. Now please would you make it even sharper, just a little bit, and answer my honest question:
Is there a smaller but still statistically plausible correlation between the odd-numbered solar maxima and the temp. highs? It looks to me as if there might be… with a time offset… I’m wondering if there could be a solar effect mediated by ocean shifts like El Nino which are only semi-predictable and likely to be lagging solar changes (like seasons lag solstice/equinox).

cba


Luther Wu says:
June 25, 2012 at 11:47 am
I heard them on TV- several times, different stations- the scientists were all saying that the sun doesn’t have anything to do with our Climate Change problems, that it’s all because of the CO2 from the industrialized free world. and that we have to shut down outr industry and do it now, while there’s still a chance.
I’m supposed to believe some lady with a blog over MSNBC and CNN?

Luther,
you think on average that there’s a significant difference in the quality of information from some lady with a blog versus msnbc or cnn? Selecting some blogger gives you around a 50/50 chance that the data is better than or the same (or worse) than msnbc or cnn. I wouldn’t advise putting any strong amount of faith in either, but at least with the ‘lady with the blog’ there is a chance of something with some accuracy. I doubt you’d have a similar chance with either msnbc or cnn. Unfortunately, they’re not consistent enough in their errors to just take what they say and invert it to get the correct information. However, if you could bet odds on it, betting against anything that msnbc or cnn says will likely make more money for you.
Ignorance and total lack of competence seems to outweigh the serious political bias one finds there.
Reagan almost said it right. “trust but verify”. If it’s important, it should simply be “don’t trust, verify!”

Luther Wu

cba says:
June 25, 2012 at 2:14 pm
“…”
____________________
Dang!
Forgot my sarc tag.

Willis Eschenbach

Lucy Skywalker says:
June 25, 2012 at 1:50 pm

Willis I appreciate your sharp eye. Now please would you make it even sharper, just a little bit, and answer my honest question:
Is there a smaller but still statistically plausible correlation between the odd-numbered solar maxima and the temp. highs? It looks to me as if there might be… with a time offset… I’m wondering if there could be a solar effect mediated by ocean shifts like El Nino which are only semi-predictable and likely to be lagging solar changes (like seasons lag solstice/equinox).

First, I haven’t a clue what you mean by “mediated by” in your post above.
Second, we’re already fairly deep into data mining. We start with one picked temperature dataset and no idea how many other datasets were discarded to find that one.
Next, we have a vague association with some solar cycle peaks but not with others.
On top of that we have a claimed association with some but not all of the El Ninos, including a total miss on the big 1998 El Nino.
Now, you want to add in a lag based on “a solar effect mediated by ocean shifts”, whatever you might mean by that.
The problem is, you have asked for a “statistically plausible correlation”. If we look at one dataset and find 95% statistical significance (p-value less than 0.5), that actually means something.
But if we look at as few as a dozen datasets, the odds are is almost a 50/50 that we will find a result with what looks exactly like 95% statistical significance purely by chance.
This is a recurring problem in climate science, where people dig through reams and reams of data, find one dataset where some relationship or trend has a p-value less than 0.05, and declare it is statistically significant … NOT.
w.

Graeme W

Willis, I appreciate your attention to detail, as I do with Leif when it comes to anything to do with solar cycles.
One thing that struck me was that the idea of a solar peak as a point in time is a very artificial concept. In reality, solar activity is spread out, with periods of higher activity and periods of lower activity.
I don’t have the tools to do it myself at the moment, but I would be interested in seeing what the graph you did looked liked if, rather than a single point for each solar cycle peak, it was plotted with a bar indicating the range of peak activity for that solar cycle. eg. The period of time when solar activity was within X of the peak (using whatever value for X – fixed amount or percentage – that seemed appropriate). After all, some solar cycles have broader peaks than others.
I suspect it still won’t show a reliable relationship, but it would be “fairer” than picking a single date as the “peak” for each solar cycle and looking for a relationship with just that single date.

Kasuha

Peaks in single years are unimportant. Average maximum temperature is highly correlated to the number of sunny days throughout the year which is random variable, no wonder the record goes up and down by large amount. Still, there is pretty nice pattern at least between 1920 and 2000 where the record appears to somewhat follow the sun activity. I guess Svensmark would like it.

Every generation is rediscovering things that had been done before. Echuca is a good example of the Hale Cycle. There are plenty of references to the 22 year cycle in rainfall. Here’s a few:
From: http://ccb.colorado.edu/lanina/report/oh.html
Before 1974, the 2-3 year cycle was dominant in precipitation variations. However, this cycle diminished when the transition occurred and then switched to a longer 3-5 year cycle. It is also interesting that the 22-year cycle becomes dominant when the signal of 2-3 year cycle diminishes as a result of the climate shift.
http://www.geo.umass.edu/climate/theses/waple-thesis.pdf
The Hale (22-year) cycle has for some time been invoked as a possible reason for a bidecadal drought rhythm in the Southwest USA and Great Plains. It is possible that this apparent cycle of drought could be due to internal variability of the ocean-atmosphere system, but as Cook et al. (1997) indicated, it is also not easy to eliminate the sun (and moon in this case) from the causal
hypotheses. It appears from Cook et al.’s findings, that since at least 1800, the lunar cycle
(18.6 years) and the Hale cycle interact to modulate the drought cycle.
From: http://www.springerlink.com/content/a2geaywxlu5dan8w/
The investigation results of the monthly precipitation and Palmer’s drought severity index (PDSI) data in three of the midwestern states – Illinois, Indiana and Ohio – show that two periodic components, the 20 to 22-year Hale cycle signal and the other component with periods between 16.9 and 13.5 years, are identified.
Also see the chapter “The Twenty-Two-Year Drought Cycle in the Western United States” in “The Role of the Sun in Climate Change” by Hoyt and Schatten. It starts on page 138.

Willis Eschenbach

Graeme W says:
June 25, 2012 at 2:48 pm

Willis, I appreciate your attention to detail, as I do with Leif when it comes to anything to do with solar cycles.
One thing that struck me was that the idea of a solar peak as a point in time is a very artificial concept. In reality, solar activity is spread out, with periods of higher activity and periods of lower activity.
I don’t have the tools to do it myself at the moment, but I would be interested in seeing what the graph you did looked liked if, rather than a single point for each solar cycle peak, it was plotted with a bar indicating the range of peak activity for that solar cycle. eg. The period of time when solar activity was within X of the peak (using whatever value for X – fixed amount or percentage – that seemed appropriate). After all, some solar cycles have broader peaks than others.
I suspect it still won’t show a reliable relationship, but it would be “fairer” than picking a single date as the “peak” for each solar cycle and looking for a relationship with just that single date.

Thanks, Graeme. Actually, the peak of the sunspot cycle is generally pretty pronounced. But that’s not why I’m going to pass on your request. The problem is that your request takes us into what I call the “kinda sorta” territory.
If you plot the entire solar cycle, then you can say “Well, the temperature kinda sorta has a relationship to a carefully selected band which includes times when the solar activity is within X of the peak” … that way lies madness. The relationship shown in my graph varies from three years before the temperature peak to four years after the peak, and includes both temperature peaks with no corresponding solar activity, as well as solar peaks with no corresponding temperature activity … in other words, no relationship.
I used to drill water wells for my daily bread, and one thing I learned was, a wise man knows when he’s digging a dry hole … and this one here is dry as a bone.
w.

Willis Eschenbach

Kasuha says:
June 25, 2012 at 3:36 pm

… Still, there is pretty nice pattern at least between 1920 and 2000 where the record appears to somewhat follow the sun activity.

Thanks, Kasuha. You clearly illustrate the problem with the human eye, which is trained and honed to detect patterns … so much so that it easily and regularly detects patterns that aren’t even there.
To repeat myself, the relationship shown in my graph varies from the solar cycle maximum being three years before the temperature peak to four years after the temperature peak, and includes both temperature peaks with no corresponding solar activity, as well as solar peaks with no corresponding temperature activity … in other words, not a “pretty nice pattern”, but in fact, no pattern at all.
All the best,
w.
PS—Our eyes are trained to detect patterns so that we can a) detect food, and b) detect predators. In both cases, the penalty for false positives (thinking you see a tiger or a mango when you don’t) is much, much smaller than the penalty for false negatives (not noticing the tiger or the mango that is there).
As a result, we see lots of stuff that, when we look carefully, turns out to be an illusion … but that’s way, way better than not seeing the tiger. On the flip side, however, it is a constant problem when looking for patterns in scientific data, which inter alia is why we have statistics.

I made a similar plot comparison along with several other comparisons for a client some years ago(04 I think). I could not find any real correlations between sun cycle (max or min) and ENSO. I did find a number of correlations between ENSO and natural gas prices, and monsoon activity but not the sun. It did appear that if the max occurred at the same time as El Niño we thought some enhancement was probably present. Were it so simple… it is anything but.

Willis Eschenbach
Thanks, Kasuha. You clearly illustrate the problem with the human eye, which is trained and honed to detect patterns … so much so that it easily and regularly detects patterns that aren’t even there.
So why not do a simple autocorrelation? Take the sunspots numbers, and subtract the average. Take the temperature, subtract the average. Then multiply the two together and average. Then offset the two by -5 to +5 years and graph the average of the correlation.
If the two are correlated, there will be a peak, if they are not it’ll be a flatish graph. This will show the point of maximum correlation … any delay between the two, and given the right scale, it’ll show how big the correlation is compared to the size of the signal.

Cloud cover controls the maximum temperature in interior Australia. With ENSO is where you will find a good correlation with maximum temperature.

Willis Eschenbach

Scottish Sceptic says:
June 25, 2012 at 4:32 pm

Willis Eschenbach

Thanks, Kasuha. You clearly illustrate the problem with the human eye, which is trained and honed to detect patterns … so much so that it easily and regularly detects patterns that aren’t even there.

So why not do a simple autocorrelation? Take the sunspots numbers, and subtract the average. Take the temperature, subtract the average. Then multiply the two together and average. Then offset the two by -5 to +5 years and graph the average of the correlation.
If the two are correlated, there will be a peak, if they are not it’ll be a flatish graph. This will show the point of maximum correlation … any delay between the two, and given the right scale, it’ll show how big the correlation is compared to the size of the signal.

Hey, go for it, Scotty. I’ve provided the sources for the two datasets. Me, I don’t dig in dry holes …
w.

Willis Eschenbach

David Archibald says:
June 25, 2012 at 3:43 pm

Every generation is rediscovering things that had been done before. Echuca is a good example of the Hale Cycle.

No, it is not a good example of the Hale cycle. It is a lousy example of any kind of cycle. Take another look at the graph I posted above. Several of the Hale cycle maxima are not associated with any temperature maximum. Several of the temperature maxima are not associated with any Hale cycle maximum. When they are near each other, the timing ranges from solar max three years before temperature max to four years after temperature max. That is a very, very poor example.
There are some climate datasets that are claimed to show a good correlation with the Hale cycle, from memory the rainfall in southern Africa, although I haven’t checked them. But the correlation in Echuca is non-existant.
w.

Willis,
Thanks for your comments. I must say that I enjoy reading your blogs. I am no expert in atmospheric physics, but was only trying to show temperature patterns in an area where we go tomatoes, and what effect temperatures may have had on their growth. By plotting max and min temperatures, I was able to find two different patterns.
I was interested in the following:
1. Why was the max trend not rising?
2. Why was the min trend going down? (Thinking about your work on clouds)
3. There does appear to be a solar pattern, but maybe I was remiss in saying it appears at the peak of the odd cycles instead of “around” the peak. There always seems to be some sort of lag in these systems.
4. I was trying to point out that when we look at global average temperatures sometimes we miss out on the detail.
5. Finally, I was pointing out that here was a station that was not close to the oceans, shielded by a mountain range, and the temperatures should not be affected by the UHI.
Regards,
Ian
P.S. it is important to look at patterns e.g. Ice cores because from there we can construct formulae that we can check to see if it fits the data as you do. One day someone may come up with a unified theory on climate.

jorgekafkazar

vukcevic says: “I have also noticed some passing resemblance between the ENSO and changes in the geomagnetic field, possibly just coincidence:”?
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/ENSO-dB.htm
I seem to see a pattern. It…it…looks like…a mango. NO! It’s a tiger! Run away. Run away! Oh, wait, it may be just coincidental wiggle matching, as you suspected in the first place. ENSO is most likely independent of the geomagnetic field. I sure can’t posit a mechanism, and ENSO is well explained except for what triggers the El Nino phase. Any ideas on the latter, Vuk?

cmarrou

If it isn’t possible to make a correlation between sunspots and temperature, is it any more possible to make a correlation between CO2 levels and temperature?

Pamela Gray

David, have you ever watched “The Life Of Bryan”? There is a scene in that movie that reminds me of your comment. Anyone who is married to their hypothesis should watch that movie before they write an article.

David L. Hagen

Willis
On correlation with the 22 year Hale cycle (~ odd Schwab solar cycle) see the analysis by
WJR Alexander who found correlations and predictions based on the 22 year Hale solar cycles on precipitation/runoff based on his exhaustive compilation of Southern African records.
Linkages between solar activity, climate predictability and water resource development*
W J R Alexander, F Bailey, D B Bredenkamp, A van der Merwe and N Willemse
Journal of the South African Institution of Civil Engineering • Volume 49 Number 2 June 2007 pp 32-44
https://www.up.ac.za/dspace/bitstream/2263/5326/1/Alexander_Linkages(2007).pdf
While there are chaotic fluctuations, Alexander shows statistical evidence for a strong change on the Hale cycle. He put all > 100 year Southern African hydrological data on a CD to give to anyone wanting to evaluate it.
Alexander’s findings could in turn infer clouds varying with the Hale Cycle.
Note your finding an opposite trend between temperate vs tropical regions in terms of increased rainfall vs increasing temperature. ie there could be correspondingly opposite trends in temperature vs tropical albedo with the Hale cycle.
Happy hunting.

WLF15Y

Willis…Curious as to a relation in temperature (more so at the poles?) not necessarily to the peak sunspot counts, but how active the sunspots were, ie…CME’s and solar winds (CHHSS) actually impacting Earth. From what I’ve seen, there seem to be periods when Cme’s impact us more often, even though we’re seeing fewer spots, and vice versa.

Willis Eschenbach says:
June 25, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Sorry … but that’s the real data, and the sunspot/temperature correlation doesn’t hold up in the slightest.
This does not deter the true believers the slightest.

@Willis
Pretty much the relationship between Milankovitch and glacial/interglacial periodicity.
Department of life lessons from actual work: one apprehends physics prying a rock out of a ditch in a way that can never be imparted in a classroom.

Paul Vaughan

@Willis Eschenbach (June 25, 2012 at 12:49 pm)
Dickey, J.O.; & Keppenne, C.L. (1997). Interannual length-of-day variations and the ENSO phenomenon: insights via singular spectral analysis.
http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/22759/1/97-1286.pdf
There’s a lot in this paper you have not understood.

sophocles

I read here on WUWT recently about a correlation between something (weather? temperature? .clouds? sunshine hours? … ) and the peak of the *previous* cycle. Cycles average 11 years but are not exact. What would it look like if this possible delay were to be factored in?
Just curious.

Paul Vaughan

@David Archibald (June 25, 2012 at 3:43 pm)
Solar magnetic ~22 year is phase-confounded with something else that has not been reported/discussed (so far as I’m aware).

Paul Vaughan

@Lucy Skywalker (June 25, 2012 at 1:50 pm)
See the Dickey & Keppenne (1997) paper to which I linked.

Paul Vaughan

There are comments in this thread from Willis, Leif, & Pamela that are inconsistent with earth rotation observations.

Paul Vaughan says:
June 25, 2012 at 9:13 pm
Dickey, J.O.; & Keppenne, C.L. (1997). Interannual length-of-day variations and the ENSO phenomenon: insights via singular spectral analysis. …
There’s a lot in this paper you have not understood.

since the paper has nothing to do with solar variations it is hardly relevant what Willis understands.

Jo replies: Thanks for the extra detail Willis. I’ve posted your graph on my site too.
You are not pouring cold water on the parade at all. I posted it as a “curiosity”, wondered if it was a one off fluke, didn’t draw any major conclusions. What parade?. Clearly it is worthy of discussion. No big conclusions can be drawn from one graph, and we didn’t do that. Instead it’s done just what I hoped, generated an interesting thread — in no small part thanks to you. 🙂
It’s clear in your graph that temperatures rise soon after the solar max in 5 out of 6 cases – as if the solar max effect may have a two year delay. The years circa 1901, 1916 and late 2000’s break the pattern (and the first two of those occur in a discontinuous early part of the series), but for 80 years from 1920 – 2002 we see a strong cycle that tightly fits with each second solar cycle delayed by 2 years. My original point remains, that this may be random, unless we see it at other sites (thanks to commentators who report they may have seen this elsewhere. )
Obviously other factors are also affecting the climate producing some noise? (Do I need to say this — seems obvious?)
There is plenty of fodder for more investigation. I hope someone can follow it up properly.
Thanks to David Archibald for the Hale cycle information — I’ll add those notes to the post too. Ta.

Richard111

All this attention to temperature maximums. The minimums from some desert regions might show something.

Paul Vaughan says:
June 25, 2012 at 9:39 pm
There are comments in this thread from Willis, Leif, & Pamela that are inconsistent with earth rotation observations.
Not with the observations, but perhaps with your unsubstantiated interpretation. And as long as you remain cryptic and don’t spell out clearly what bugs you, you are not bringing anything to the table.

jorgekafkazar says: June 25, 2012 at 5:26 pm
……………
Hi Jorge
You post is reminiscent of the long forgotten comic strips I use to read; on the less serious note though (this is climate science after all), without meaning to step on anyone’s toes, the ENSO appears to be the simpler equatorial version of the AMO, kind of the ‘AMO-lite’.

Kasuha

Willis Eschenbach says:
June 25, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Thanks, Kasuha. You clearly illustrate the problem with the human eye, which is trained and honed to detect patterns … so much so that it easily and regularly detects patterns that aren’t even there.
______________________________________
You completely ignored the first part of my post which was supposed to mean that there is a lot of noise. Now if you want to do real analysis, please remove the noise first. I’m not saying there is correlation, I only say I see that there may be some if you take care of the noise. And your way of analysis is no proof there isn’t any because what you are looking at is just the noise and nothing else.

Willis Eschenbach

Paul Vaughan says:
June 25, 2012 at 9:13 pm

@Willis Eschenbach (June 25, 2012 at 12:49 pm)
Dickey, J.O.; & Keppenne, C.L. (1997). Interannual length-of-day variations and the ENSO phenomenon: insights via singular spectral analysis.
http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/22759/1/97-1286.pdf
There’s a lot in this paper you have not understood.

Paul, the mere fact that you have recommended the paper in such an unpleasant and paternalistic manner greatly reduces my chances of reading it. You desperately need to adjust your attitude if you want people to follow your lead, and do try not to be so unbearably supercilious, you don’t wear it well. You have no clue what I do and don’t understand, either about LOD or El Niño, so don’t pretend you do, you just look foolish.
If you have a point to make, Paul, then make it … but absent any clue about what your point is, I can hardly see what length of day and ENSO have to do with the subject under discussion. You sure you read the head post? I’m commenting on the Hale cycle and its lack of correlation with the Echuca temperature … how on earth does LOD or El Nino fit into that?
w.