The Danger Of Short Datasets

Spread the love

From Watts Up With That?

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

A couple of months ago, I came across another claim that the solar sunspot cycle affects weather down here at the earth’s surface, in particular, ocean temperatures in the El Nino region of the tropical Pacific Ocean.

The paper is called Evidence of solar 11-year cycle from Sea Surface Temperature (SST), by Mazza and Canuto, hereinafter MC2021. I wrote about it in my post “CEEMD Versus Joe Fourier”. In this post, I thought I’d expand my analysis a bit and clarify one of the reasons why the MC2021 claims are not true.

Now, folks who read my work may be aware that I started out as a true believer in the idea that sunspots affect surface weather. As a kid, I’d read about William Herschel’s 1801 claim that sunspots affected wheat prices in England. So I thought it would be very easy to find evidence that the variations in solar energy caused by sunspots actually changed surface weather.

But when I first went to actually look at the data, I found … nothing. So I kept looking. Since then I’ve looked at dozens and dozens of claimed correlations and found … nothing. Well, that’s not exactly true. I did find a scientific paper called “On The Insignificance Of Herschel’s Sunspot Correlation“, wherein the author looked for hard evidence to back up Herschel’s claim and found …


So, I was interested in the MC2021 paper. It says:

After having downloaded and analysed hundreds of temperature records of the earth surface, eventually, we found clear evidence for the sun’s 11-years cycle signature in some few cases, while for the vast majority of the others this wasn’t detectable, buried under other oscillations (seasonal or El-Nino related) or noise. We found that two conditions are the most favourable in finding the proper sun’s signature in temperature records: as a rule of thumbs:

Focus on the sea surface tropical temperatures, in the range 5°N – 5°S. This is not surprising, there solar rays transfer their energy to surface waters with less reflection or scattering and with an optimum incidence angle.

Forget anomalies or indices of whatever type; for our goals this is only data jamming.Look whenever possible to real sea surface temperatures (SST).

After careful analyses of the many temperature records of the whole earth surface temperature, as well as of selected regions, we identified two regions as the most affected by the 11-year solar cycle. Both of them refer to ocean equatorial regions, known to climatologist as El-Nino-3 and El-Nino-3-4.

Hmm, sez I … here’s their money graph showing the claimed relationship:

Figure 1. Figure 4 from MC2021, showing the relationship between sunspots and the cycles in the El Nino regions.

Hmmm, sez I … so I went to see if I could replicate their findings. Instead of just using the Nino4 and Nino34 indexes, I also used the Multivariate ENSO Index (MEI) and the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI). All of these are known to correlate in some strong manner with the El Nino/La Nina oscillation in the tropical Pacific. (I have not used the NINO3 Index as they did, because it does not correlate with the others.) Here’s that result, starting in 1979, which is the start of the MEI dataset.

Figure 2. A comparison of the underlying ~ 11-year cycles in the sunspots and the tropical Pacific Ocean. Cycles have been determined using Complete Empirical Ensemble Mode Decomposition.

Hmmm, sez I … one thing is for sure. The Nino4, Nino34, MEI, and SOI are all clearly different measures of the same underlying phenomenon. In each dataset, you can see the recent very long La Nina conditions at the right side of the graph, and the datasets agree well with each other throughout.

And all of them line up quite well with the sunspots, with a lag of a couple of years between the sunspots and the tropical ocean indexes.

So what’s not to like?

Well, what’s not to like is that the data is very short. My rule of thumb is that you can’t tell much with only three cycles of some phenomenon, and I’ve been fooled more than once by even five cycles. And here we have only four cycles.

Fortunately, although the MEI only goes back to 1979, the other three indices go back much further. Here are the full datasets, starting in 1870.

Figure 3. A comparison of the post-1870 underlying ~ 11-year cycles in the tropical Pacific Ocean. Cycles have been determined using Complete Empirical Ensemble Mode Decomposition.

Since there is reasonably good agreement between the timing of the cycles of the three datasets, let me use their average to represent the long-term conditions in the tropical Pacific, and compare that to the sunspot data.

Figure 4. A comparison of the post-1870 sunspots and the average underlying ~ 11-year cycles in the tropical Pacific Ocean. Cycles have been determined using Complete Empirical Ensemble Mode Decomposition.

I’m sure you can see the difficulty. Prior to about 1945, the ocean is way out of phase with the sunspots. And the further back you go, the greater the disagreement between the two datasets. In addition, the envelopes of the signals are very dissimilar. You’d expect that if the solar signal is strong, the temperature should be strong also … but that’s not the case at all.

You can see this via Fourier analysis as well. The more recent post-1960 part of the ENSO record has a clear 12-year cycle (not 11 but 12 years, blue line, right panel) … but when you look at the full dataset back to 1870 (red line, right panel), that cycle disappears down into the noise and changes to a 13-year cycle. Note that this doesn’t happen with the sunspot data (left panel). There, the 11-year cycle is always clearly above the noise and remains steady at 11 years.

Figure 5. Fourier periodograms of the full-length (red) and post-1960 sunspots (left panel), and Nino4 index(right panel).

Unfortunately for those of us studying climate science, we’re looking at a hugely complex system. The climate is composed of six major subsystems—the atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, and electrosphere. Each of these subsystems has internal resonances and cycles occurring at a variety of timescales from milliseconds to millions of years. Not only that, but all the subsystems are exchanging energy on a variety of regular, intermittently regular, and random intervals on the same timescales. Finally, the system is fueled by a constantly varying source of energy.

Even the IPCC acknowledges that this system is totally chaotic, chaos that has existed for millions of years. And as a result, we often see what I call “pseudocycles”. These are cyclical variations in some given datasets. However, they are not true cycles—they appear without warning, last for some time, and then fade away and disappear, replaced by some other pseudocycles.

This problem is exacerbated by the fact that so many of our weather-related datasets are so short, often shorter than one human lifetime. The MSU dataset of the lower troposphere temperature is only 44 years of data, shorter than most lives. Same for the Multivariate Enso Index. Same for the post-1970 data used in the paper under discussion, MC2021.

And this intersection of short datasets and pseudocycles leads to lots of claims of cyclical behavior in surface temperature datasets, particularly regarding sunspots, where no true, unchanging cycles actually exist.

There’s a final problem. This has to do with the fact that natural weather datasets are often what’s called “autocorrelated”. This means that today’s temperature is often related to yesterday’s temperature, and this month’s temperature is often related to last month’s temperature.

The problem is that autocorrelated data often includes cycles … cycles that may or may not mean something. For example, here’s a random autocorrelated dataset, of a type called “Fractional Gaussian Noise” or “FGN”. As the name implies, it’s just noise, no meaningful signals. Note how closely it resembles say a natural temperature dataset.

Figure 6. An example of random fractional gaussian noise (FGN).

And here’s the CEEMD decomposition of that same FGN dataset. Remember, this is just noise, no actual signals present.

Figure 7. CEEMD analysis of an example of random fractional gaussian noise (FGN).

So … what are we looking at here? Well, the left panel shows the individual signals resulting from the decomposition of the FGN noise. As you can see, there are signals at a variety of frequencies, with a residual showing what’s left after all the regular signals are removed.

The right panel, on the other hand, shows “periodograms” of each of the signals in the left panel, with corresponding colors. The periodograms show what the strongest cycles are in the decomposed signals. As you can see, the strongest cycle is at 10 years, shown in green. You can see that signal on the left panel. Must be from sunspots! … oh, wait, it’s just random Gaussian noise …

However, the ten-year cycles are far from a regular signal. Both the amplitude and the cycle length are constantly changing, as can be seen in the green line of the left-hand panel. It’s also revealed by the smaller peaks in the green line on the right-hand panel.

That, dear friends, is what I have termed a “pseudocycle”. It’s “pseudo” because it is not an unchanging, persistent cycle. Instead, it’s just one of the many cycles that we find in all autocorrelated data, meaningless cycles that appear, change, and disappear.

Notice also that the FGN noise contains a persistent trend, the black line at the bottom right of the left panel. This is the result of the same thing, autocorrelation. As discussed in the AGU article “Nature’s Style: Naturally Trendy“, trends in natural datasets may mean just as little as the trend displayed by this FGN data.

And this is why in climate science folks must always, each and every time, adjust their statistical claims for autocorrelation … for example, without adjustment for autocorrelation, the statistics of the FGN signal shown above say the trend is very meaningful, with a p-value of <2e-16.

But once we adjust for autocorrelation and use the Bonferroni calculation to adjust for the fact that I looked at 5 FGN datasets to find that one, it turns out that it’s not statistically significant at all, with an autocorrelation and Bonferroni adjusted p-value of 0.075 … just random noise after all.

Climate science. Hidden potholes everywhere.

My best wishes to all,


The Usual Request: Quote the exact words you are discussing. I can defend my words. I can’t defend your (mis) understandings of my words. Thanks.

Further Readings: Most of my prior sunspot investigations …

Congenital Cyclomania Redux 2013-07-23

Well, I wasn’t going to mention this paper, but it seems to be getting some play in the blogosphere. Our friend Nicola Scafetta is back again, this time with a paper called “Solar and planetary oscillation control on climate change: hind-cast, forecast and a comparison with the CMIP5 GCMs”. He’s…

Cycles Without The Mania 2013-07-29

Are there cycles in the sun and its associated electromagnetic phenomena? Assuredly. What are the lengths of the cycles? Well, there’s the question. In the process of writing my recent post about cyclomania, I came across a very interesting paper entitled “Correlation Between the Sunspot Number, the Total Solar Irradiance,…

Sunspots and Sea Level 2014-01-21

I came across a curious graph and claim today in a peer-reviewed scientific paper. Here’s the graph relating sunspots and the change in sea level: And here is the claim about the graph: Sea level change and solar activity A stronger effect related to solar cycles is seen in Fig.…

Riding A Mathemagical Solarcycle 2014-01-22

Among the papers in the Copernicus Special Issue of Pattern Recognition in Physics, we find a paper from R. J. Salvador in which he says he has developed A mathematical model of the sunspot cycle for the past 1000 yr. Setting aside the difficulties of verification of sunspot numbers for…

Sunny Spots Along the Parana River 2014-01-25

In a comment on a recent post, I was pointed to a study making the following surprising claim: Here, we analyze the stream flow of one of the largest rivers in the world, the Parana ́ in southeastern South America. For the last century, we find a strong correlation with…

Usoskin Et Al. Discover A New Class of Sunspots 2014-02-22

There’s a new post up by Usoskin et al. entitled “Evidence for distinct modes of solar activity”. To their credit, they’ve archived their data, it’s available here. Figure 1 shows their reconstructed decadal averages of sunspot numbers for the last three thousand years, from their paper: Figure 1. The results…

Solar Periodicity 2014-04-10

I was pointed to a 2010 post by Dr. Roy Spencer over at his always-interesting blog. In it, he says that he can show a relationship between total solar irradiance (TSI) and the HadCRUT3 global surface temperature anomalies. TSI is the strength of the sun’s energy at a specified distance…

Cosmic Rays, Sunspots, and Beryllium 2014-04-13

In investigations of the past history of cosmic rays, the deposition rates (flux rates) of the beryllium isotope 10Be are often used as a proxy for the number of cosmic rays. This is because 10Be is produced, inter alia, by cosmic rays in the atmosphere. Being a congenitally inquisitive type…

The Tip of the Gleissberg 2014-05-17

A look at Gleissberg’s famous solar cycle reveals that it is constructed from some dubious signal analysis methods. This purported 80-year “Gleissberg cycle” in the sunspot numbers has excited much interest since Gleissberg’s original work. However, the claimed length of the cycle has varied widely.

The Effect of Gleissberg’s “Secular Smoothing” 2014-05-19

ABSTRACT: Slow Fourier Transform (SFT) periodograms reveal the strength of the cycles in the full sunspot dataset (n=314), in the sunspot cycle maxima data alone (n=28), and the sunspot cycle maxima after they have been “secularly smoothed” using the method of Gleissberg (n = 24). In all three datasets, there…

It’s The Evidence, Stupid! 2014-05-24

I hear a lot of folks give the following explanation for the vagaries of the climate, viz: It’s the sun, stupid. And in fact, when I first started looking at the climate I thought the very same thing. How could it not be the sun, I reasoned, since obviously, that’s…

Sunspots and Sea Surface Temperature 2014-06-06

I thought I was done with sunspots … but as the well-known climate scientist Michael Corleone once remarked, “Just when I thought I was out … they pull me back in”. In this case, Marcel Crok, the well-known Dutch climate writer, asked me if I’d seen the paper from Nir…

Maunder and Dalton Sunspot Minima 2014-06-23

In a recent interchange over at Joanne Nova’s always-interesting blog, I’d said that the slow changes in the sun have little effect on temperature. Someone asked me, well, what about the cold temperatures during the Maunder and Dalton sunspot minima? And I thought … hey, what about them? I…

Changes in Total Solar Irradiance 2014-10-25

Total solar irradiance, also called “TSI”, is the total amount of energy coming from the sun at all frequencies. It is measured in watts per square meter (W/m2). Lots of folks claim that the small ~ 11-year variations in TSI are amplified by some unspecified mechanism, and thus these small changes in TSI make an…

Splicing Clouds 2014-11-01

So once again, I have donned my Don Quijote armor and continued my quest for a ~11-year sunspot-related solar signal in some surface weather dataset. My plan for the quest has been simple. It is based on the fact that all of the phenomena commonly credited with affecting the temperature,…

Volcanoes and Sunspots 2015-02-09

I keep reading how sunspots are supposed to affect volcanoes. In the comments to my last post, Tides, Earthquakes, and Volcanoes, someone approvingly quoted a volcano researcher who had looked at eleven eruptions of a particular type and stated: …. Nine of the 11 events occurred during the solar inactive phase…

Early Sunspots and Volcanoes 2015-02-10

Well, as often happens I started out in one direction and then I got sidetractored … I wanted to respond to Michele Casati’s claim in the comments of my last post. His claim was that if we include the Maunder Minimum in the 1600s, it’s clear that volcanoes with a…

Sunspots and Norwegian Child Mortality 2015-03-07

In January there was a study published by The Royal Society entitled “Solar activity at birth predicted infant survival and women’s fertility in historical Norway”, available here. It claimed that in Norway in the 1700s and 1800s, the solar activity at birth affected a child’s survival chances. As you might imagine, this…

The New Sunspot Data And Satellite Sea Levels 2015-08-13

[UPDATE:”Upon reading Dr. Shaviv’s reply to this post, I have withdrawn any mention of “deceptive” from this post. This term was over the top, as it ascribed motive to the authors. I have replaced the term with “misleading”. This is more accurate…

My Thanks Apologies And Reply To Dr. Nir Shaviv 2015-08-17

Dr. Nir Shaviv has kindly replied in the comments to my previous post. There, he says: Nir Shaviv” August 15, 2015, at 2:51 pm There is very little truth about any of the points raised by Eschenbach in this article. In particular, his analysis excludes the fact that the o…

Is The Signal Detectable 2015-08-19

[UPDATE] In the comments, Nick Stokes pointed out that although I thought that Dr. Shaviv’s harmonic solar component was a 12.6-year sine wave with a standard deviation of 1.7 centimeters, it is actually a 12.6-year sine wave with a standard deviation of 1.7 millime…

The Missing 11-Year Signal 2015-08-19

Dr. Nir Shaviv and others strongly believe that there is an ~ 11-year solar signal visible in the sea level height data. I don’t think such a signal is visible. So I decided to look for it another way, one I’d not seen used before. One of the more sensitive …

23 New Papers 2015-09-22

Over at Pierre Gosselin’s site, NoTricksZone, he’s trumpeting the fact that there are a bunch of new papers showing a solar effect on the climate. The headline is Already 23 Papers Supporting Sun As Major Climate Factor In 2015 “Burgeoning Evidence No Longer Dismissible!…

The Cosmic Problem With Rays 2016-10-17

Normal carbon has six neutrons and six protons, for an atomic weight of twelve. However, there is a slightly different form of carbon which has two extra neutrons. That form of carbon, called carbon-14 or ’14C’, has an atomic weight of fourteen. It is known to be formed by the …

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.