Re: The Sun has no South Pole

In Article <9sbrne$7f5$1@slb2.atl.mindspring.net> Greg Davidson wrote:
> http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf096/sf096a03.htm

Which stated:
    Astronomers have been shocked by the discovery that 
    the sun has no south pole! Instruments on board the 
    probe Ulysses have been measuring the radial 
    component of the solar magnetic field. 
        No Solar Pole, New Scientist, p. 11, September 24, 1994.

To which one of the Shepherds of sci.astro, David Knisely stated:

In Article <3BEAA8BD.320FD4C7@mail1.savemail.com> David Bos wrote:
> In Article <3BEA2337.2A87E23F@navix.net> Davie Knisely wrote:
>> Contrary to the claim, the sun *does* have a south pole, 
>> since it does rotate about an axis with one end 
>> considered to be north and the other south.  
>
> except that the claim is not about geographic south 
> pole, it is about magnetic south pole

Good one, David Bos :-) And the response from Shepherd David Knisley,
wrong wrong again, was.

In Article <3BEB21F2.2968C93C@navix.net> David Knisely wrote:
> I don't see the word "magnetic" in this statement.  
> Ulysses measured an interplanetary magnetic field 
> and not whether the sun has a south pole. The sun's 
> field varies all over the place, and as the sunspot 
> cycles goes on, there are times when the field 
> strength at the poles of rotation is small.  The 
> polarity of the overall field also reverses every 11 
> years, so the south MAGNETIC pole can be in a 
> different location than it was during the last solar 
> cycle.

Wrong.  Wrong wrong wrong!  See next posts for how VERY wrong he is.