Re: The question now is: Does the solar 11 year cycle cause the recent sudden increase in temperature, and not CO2?

Light is definitely electromagnetic interference, but the people who talk about that are rather more specific about the interfering frequencies than you have been.

The suns photosphere is a roughly black body radiator at about 6000K, but the solar corona, while thinner has much hotter spots which produce very hard UV, and magnetic fields and charged particles which produce intense lower frequency radiation

But it is used by people who known what it means, and you clearly don't. The implication is always that it is electromagnetic inference at frequencies that matter in context under discussion. You failed to establish a context.

Pointing out that you can't express yourself clearly isn't saying anything about anybody else.

You do like to make this claim, but you don't bother to support it with any kind of rational argument.

I do know that you haven't got enough sense to spell out the acronym, and you use the phase as if it defined the frequency of the interfering radiation, which it doesn't.

A a is citizen half-wit. He can volunteer his meagre abilities for all he is worth, but he isn't a scientist's bootlace.

to make geriatrics to grow on popularity, publishing fake n umber of sunspots, i.e. 15 is the real number, as seen by Rudolf Wolf in the past and as seen and calculated by few sun observatories and what is published is 150 sunspots fake Wolf Number

The sun takes 25 days to rotate at it's equator and 36 days at it's poles. We can only count the sunspots we can see on the area directly facing us, which is rather less than all of them.

We've put artificial satellites into orbit around the sun, but not - so far - enough of them to get a better number.

It started in Zurich in 1848. It certainly wasn't fake when it started up, and nobody sane thinks that it is now,

A a's ideas about science are comically ignorant. He seems to get them from climate change denial propaganda, which is aimed at gullible twits.

Or so a a likes to think.,

They aren't. The short term stuff is mostly due to ocean current moving around. The alternation between El Nino and La Nina has been known about for quite a while, but the Multidecadal Atlantic Oscillation was on,ly named in 2000.

But you can't provide any links to them, and clearly haven't got a clue what they mean,

That is what the climate change denial propaganda machine seems to want to claim. It's fatuous nonsense, but their propganda has to be aimed at gullible twits - nobody else could take it seriously - and it gets recycled by gullible twits.