How about just coming out and saying El Nino and La Nina rule the roost and any human signal is minute? Stop trying to make excuses as to why the hypothesis doesn't work.
It's like me saying to my new neighbor that I plant radishes to keep the wolverine's away. Does it work? he asks...well, you don't see any wolverine's around, do you? I reply.

Very Interesting;
El Nino/La Nina controlled by the sun while the agenda is controlled by Zealots.

The Sun Proves an Embarassment to Climate Orthodoxers and Carbon Hysterics

http://alfin2100.blogspot.com/2008/11/sun-proves-embarassment-to-climate.html

2007 was also an El Nino year. In fact Hansen forecast a possible "Super El Nino" in December, 2006. According to GISS, Had-Crut, UAH and RSS, temperatures have been falling since 2002.

One decade of cooling isn't enough. Maybe after two or three decades where the temperature falls further and further below IPCC estimates will some AGW funded scientists begin to get a clue. I can easily imagine some bitter old men 20 years from now, talking fondly to their grandkids about the great El Nino of 1998.

Hi Brett : Anyone who follows the global warming war of words would be advised to take a look at the attacks Steve has launched on Micheal Mann this past week over at Climate Audit. Most folk would be hard pressed to take Mann or his hockey stick seriously after reading this plus it exposes the " peer reviewing " mantra as a sham since the reviewers never seem to find the flaws and the process seems to be one of peer rubber stamping IMHO.
Be good,
Rick.

OK, I'll concede this point:
The global warming signal is confused.

Talk about a confusing signal!

October Global Anomaly:
RSS MSU - +0.18 C
UAH MSU - +0.16 C

GISTEMP - +0.78 C

GISS just lost all credibility.

LOLs! This is proof my "UNDERWATER SUSPENSION TUNNEL" idea can regulate Earths climate by regulating the tropical SSTs.

Off topic.... sort of.
A while back I posted some comments and links about how eco-nutbars were becoming dangerous and soon could become a real and present threat.

Sadly, it seems it was inevitable:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/09/eco-terrorism-earth-first-elf

Patrick Henry your absolutely right. We agree!

If the cooling trend continues for a few more years then there is definitely a buck in the GW trend and this would be a good thing.

However, this cooling is more than like not a turn around of global warming. It is still well within the variability of the climate.

See graph below which shows similar cooling around 1950 & 1965.
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/

This article also discusses the issue...
Global warming: Met Office predicts plateau then record temperatures
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/aug/10/weather.uknews

A message from Gore in yesterday's NYT: "To those who are still tempted to dismiss the increasingly urgent alarms from scientists around the world, ignore the melting of the north polar ice cap and all of the other apocalyptic warnings from the planet itself, and who roll their eyes at the very mention of this existential threat to the future of the human species, please wake up. Our children and grandchildren need you to hear and recognize the truth of our situation, before it is too late."

He truly is kind of a sluggish Santa in a big green suit -- he may not know if I've been bad or good, but he knows when I'm rolling my eyes. But I suspect that there won't be coal in my stocking, just a bill for my carbon footprint.

D Caldwell | November 10, 2008 11:36 AM --- You are comparing apples and organes; lower troposhere with surface. Compare GISS with HadCRUTv3 and NCDC.

D Caldwell | November 10, 2008 11:36 AM --- You are comparing apples and organes; lower troposhere with surface. Compare GISS with HadCRUTv3 and NCDC.

A good follow up for Katie might be to do one one PDO. Then she might do one on how climate models account for ENSO and PDO (not). The she might point out that the first 20 years of the last 30 year trend were heavily influenced by the domination of El Ninos, whereas prior to that La Nina's were dominant.

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/people/klaus.wolter/MEI/ts.gif

If we are going to educate the public, then let's get all of the information out there.

Patrick: You may be interested in what Watts has found out with the October GISS data. It was copied from September (Russia) Is this attempted fraud?

D Caldwell | November 10, 2008 11:36 AM --- There is a recent thread about this error on RealClimate, entitled "Mountains and molehills".

David Benson wrote:
"You are comparing apples and organes; lower troposhere with surface. Compare GISS with HadCRUTv3 and NCDC."

David, thanks but I already know the difference between the satellite mounted MSU and the surface gridded products. Why would I compare GISS to Hadley and NCDC? All three are based pretty much on the same flawed network of surface stations that covers less of the globe than it did 10 years ago.

The point I was making (that you missed) is that the surface gridded data is losing its credibility for many of us.

BTW, the GISTEMP global number for October is found to be full of serious errors and, as I said, is no longer credible. I look forward to reading the official explanation from the House of Hanson.

Caldwell:
"The point I was making (that you missed) is that the surface gridded data is losing its credibility for many of us."

Actually, HadCrut3 is tracking relatively well with UAH and RSS. The spread between them is due to the selected baseline years. But they are not diverging.

GISS, on the other hand, is diverging strongly from HadCrut3, RSS, and UAH. It is an outlier at this time. Hansen is determined to keep the hoax going by himself if need be.

http://reallyrealclimate.blogspot.com/2008/10/updated-11-year-global-temp-anomoly.html

Double click the chart to see a larger version.

Dies ist ein großer Ort. Ich möchte hier noch einmal.