A recent post on RealClimate discusses how easy it is to get fooled when analyzing data. It focuses on two recent papers, which critique other papers that go astray in assessing the relationship between solar activity and climate. I’d like to discuss one of those critiques, Legras et al. 2010, A critical look at solar-climate relationships from long temperature series (Climate of the Past, 6, 745-758, doi:10.5194/cp-6-745-2010).
 | drfog on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | Peter Prewett on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | sailrick on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | geoffbeacon on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | Aldo A. Bertozzi-Sib… on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | Bob Loblaw on How Climate Deniers can… |
 | Doc Snow on It’s real, it’s us… |
| Doc Snow on It’s real, it’s us… |
| Doc Snow on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | smallbluemike on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | smurfix on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | Al Rodger on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | Martin Smith on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | Dave Kahn on It’s real, it’s us… |
 | jgnfld on How Climate Deniers can… |
