mjp2, simply by just acknowledging that you have got it wrong with your interpretation of what La nina does is all that is required.
I never once even bothered to tie la nina's cycles, frequencies or whatever else you choose to fabricate to any other phenomenon.
So it is not I who is missing anything.
You have been proven wrong from your own source. Accept it and move on mjp2.
In regards to
sunspot activity not solar irradiance or output. I did initially say 250%. For which i later acknowledged to be incorrect. In fact it is closer to 200%. In terms of equating sunspots to irradiance is riduculous. It is well known by all that the direct radiation variation is minor. However the indirect effects of sunspots is huge. Now this is not the first time you have alluded to the irrellevance of sunspots. So like La nina (consequently proven you are wrong.) i am not convinced that you are familiar the outcome of sunspot activity either.
Here is the chart again "sigh"
you can continue to back peddle. Change the argument to digress from what you said about La nina. It does not matter to me.
Looks like we are about to move onto solar activity. This is a discussion that i feel is ignored by many.
Happy to go there with you.