>Alan asked in [OPE-L:2933]:
>
>> a) is the inevitable dryness theorem a correct
>> theorem?
>
>The "inevitable dryness theorem" depends critically on the assumption that
>"God" has and uses a "Dirty Great Big Umbrella." This assumption violates
>logic, scientific evidence, and the laws of physics. It must be rejected.
>If it is not rejected then we need to take a fresh look at (among other
>things): a) the flat earth hypothesis (btw, still accepted in South Africa
>by some Afrikaaners); b) Jevons's sunspot theory for business cycle
>variations; and c) the Tooth Fairy hypothesis.
>
It is unfair to categorise the sunspot theory along with the others here.
It now seems likely that sunspots do have an influence on climate and
on agricultural production. If there is an inbuilt oscillatory tendancy
in capitalist economies with a period approximately equal to 10 years,
then it is not implausible that external forcing by climatic variations
might bring this into phase with the sunspot cycle. I dont know if this
is true, but it is at least plausible and can be the subject of practical
investigation.
Paul Cockshott
wpc@cs.strath.ac.uk
http://www.cs.strath.ac.uk/CS/Biog/wpc/index.html