In article ,
"Alastair McDonald" k
wrote:

"Steve Schulin" wrote...
"Rob Overfield" wrote:

My analysis: Piers Corbyn = fraudster.

You ask him to put his method under scientific analysis, and see what he
says!

Gee whiz, he might just refer to Dennis Wheeler's peer reviewed article
which reports exactly that which you appear to think undone:
Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 63:29-34, 2001

I assume you mean this?

A verification of UK gale forecasts by the 'solar weather technique': October
1995-September 1997

Dennis Wheeler,

Geography Department, University of Sunderland, Forster Building, Chester
Road, Sunderland SR1 3SD, UK

Received 27 September 1999; revised 24 April 2000; accepted 23 June 2000.
Available online 29 November 2000.

Abstract
In recent years the 'solar weather' technique of weather forecasting which
takes into account of the influence of the sun has received much attention. No
attempt has hitherto been made to determine the success, or otherwise, of
elements of these forecasts, which include solar predictors and are prepared
6-11 months in advance of the events they predict. This paper conducts an
evaluation of these forecasts but confines attention to the prediction of
gales. Skill levels are assessed over different seasons. The results, whilst
differing greatly between the seasons, reveal a degree of success that cannot
readily be accounted for by chance and suggest that this system of forecasting
continues to be assessed over a longer time period to further investigate
these findings.

Cheers, Alastair.

That's the right title, and the dates look appropriate for the Jan 2001
hard copy publication issue. doi:10.1016/S1364-6826(00)0015 5-3

Very truly,

Steve Schulin
http://www.nuclear.com