> "only roughly so, since the Sun is dynamic"

Of course it is. As I said the orbital dynamics causing the daily cycle and the annual cycle are responsible for most of the variability -- this is not due to "the wind". Then, adding in the external gravitational forcing, we get such variability as the tidal cycles, LOD cycles, and these other mysterious behaviors known as ENSO, QBO, Chandler Wobble, MJO, TIW, AMO, PDO, PNA, NAO, IOD, AO, AAO, which all share a common-mode mechanism.

BTW

> "These would help explain why your model *might not prove able* to predict the next few ENSO cycles, if that is the outcome."

You think I care one iota about being able to predict the next few ENSO cycles? Taking that by itself, predicting the next few cycles will only raise the question as whether that happened purely by chance.

Of course it is. As I said the orbital dynamics causing the daily cycle and the annual cycle are responsible for most of the variability -- this is not due to "the wind". Then, adding in the external gravitational forcing, we get such variability as the tidal cycles, LOD cycles, and these other mysterious behaviors known as ENSO, QBO, Chandler Wobble, MJO, TIW, AMO, PDO, PNA, NAO, IOD, AO, AAO, which all share a common-mode mechanism.

BTW

> "These would help explain why your model *might not prove able* to predict the next few ENSO cycles, if that is the outcome."

You think I care one iota about being able to predict the next few ENSO cycles? Taking that by itself, predicting the next few cycles will only raise the question as whether that happened purely by chance.