Cross-Validation of ENSO

Experimenting with linking to slide presentations instead of a trad blog post. The PDF linked below is an eye-opener as the NINO34 fit is the most parsimonious ever, at the expense of a higher LTE modulation (explained here). The cross-validation involves far fewer tidal factors than dealt with earlier, the two factors used (Mf and Mm tidal factors) rivaling the one factor used in QBO (described here).

BTW, separating out the slide content provides an outlet for griping about why no one is interested in this research. I continue to find a lot of belly-aching about that it’s too hard or can’t be done, topped off by a pseudonymous clown named Piotr who replied to me by name on RealClimate, claiming that ENSO modeling does not qualify as valid climate science since it doesn’t involve AGW!

And of course, the pull quote was from a RealClimate introduction I made in 2015 describing how John Carlos Baez had started a project to model ENSO in 2014, in which I have continued to contribute to via Baez’s Azimuth Project forum.

So, Piotr was motivated enough to Google search back to 2015 when I was first starting on this topic, but doesn’t have the intellectual curiosity to maybe contribute something to the discussion? Actually, it’s been over 7 years now since I started down this path and no one (still alive**) has shown any real interest. I find that amazing considering that this is supposedly cutting-edge research with a number of cited publications to draw from. Let’s monitor how long this will continue.

Comment below or on Twitter @whut

One thought on “Cross-Validation of ENSO

Leave a Reply to Puͣkiͧte̍ 🇱🇻 (@WHUT) Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s