One of Scientific America's stories this month is: New Data: Hurricanes Will Get Worse

New data from hurricane Harvey last year gives the author the ideas that hurricanes will be bigger, more frequent and cause tooth decay.

OK. I added tooth decay. He might as well add tooth decay because that is as easily inferred from ONE SINGLE DATA SET.

If I had turned in this paper, my advisor would have ripped me a new one. HOW are you supposed to make general observations about a phenomenon like hurricanes from one data set???

The ONLY REASON you would do that is because the data set is saying what you want it to say. 

Down South here we are very familiar with the big, honking hurricane that blow through occasionally and rewrite the map.  We have learned something very interesting about them.

The killer storms come in years corresponding with the Solar Minimum. It's a cycle the sun goes through every eleven years. 

Last year when the big storms hit: Harvey, Maria and Irma, do a little math. What was almost ~11 years before? Remember Katrina(? ~Eleven years before that? Hurricane John. 11 years before that? Alice in 1983. Agnes in 1972. Ester and Carla in 1961. In 1950 there were 6. 1939 there were 6. 1928 there were 4 including the Okeechobe Hurricane that killed 4,000. In 1917 there were 7 hurricanes including Nueva Gerona Hurricane- the strongest hurricane to hit Florida until Andrew in 1992 (a year off the tick). 

What we are being told- climate change is driving bigger storms. Based on Harvey.  ONE STORM.

What is the data REALLY saying??? Based on 100 years of storm data???  Solar minimums drive bigger storms and clusters of storms. 

Solar minimum years and their cusps (the year ahead or behind the minimum) have had some of the most devastating storms in history.

Remember THAT when you read someone's work when they talk about data gathered from ONE storm.