To: Maurice Winn who wrote (23413 ) 12/11/2008 3:06:50 PM From: neolib Respond to of 36917 Sun spots are not the only variable. Yeh, they are minor. CO2 is bigger. As for the rest, you argue for lags (all the stuff about heat sinks) but then try to claim that the first and last half match without lags. It doesn't work both ways. If the lags are short enough to get the match (overall solar cycles and temps) of the first vs 2'nd half of the century, then the time constants are short enough that you should also see each cycle reflected in the temp record, but with a delay, and reduced amplitude. Basic signal analysis. You don't see that effect. For your edification, nobody reputable is trying to claim a relationship between solar cycle AMPLITUDE and global temps. The guys running around claiming "its the Sun stupid" have latched onto solarcyle PERIODS, claiming an inverse (IIRC) relationship between cycle period and temps. Of course, these fools play a bunch of games, such as shifting the phase, and inverting the phase when needed to make the graph come out looking as needed. Which is why I dismiss them as fools. But stop barking up the amplitude tree. The solar period guys latest great hope is that somehow the solar cycles modulate cosmic rays which affect clouds which affect temps and this correlates with period modulation. Fine, perhaps one day they will succeed at showing something like this, but the status today is only VERY speculative at BEST, and in most cases, contrary evidence exists. (Think of faith and religion). IIRC, most of these guys are out of Scandinavia for some odd reason. From what I've read on the subject, I see all the crank warming signs, so I'm not expecting anything significant to come of it.