PaulP:"It only gives one the impression that they have control over the data. In this case, the interactive control makes it seem as if the movement is downward, as if the wind itself is sinking."
It did not seem that way to me nor, no doubt, to the scientists who created the presentation. Its a straw-man to suggest otherwise. If "control over the data" is what you claim to have, you must account for and filter Lunisolar Tidal Noise on the sensors. This is no mere "hand-waving" issue, but a specific figure-of-merit (the proposed "Pukite Number") to rigorously validate your ENSO-QBO Models over others.
Here is another specific prediction- That daily Tidal Noise, in the sense that its not a quasi-periodic long-period forcing, will show up in ENSO-jet velocity data. This excitation is akin to LLJ acceleration above a nocturnal surface inversion layer. The increasing number of testable predictions on offer here are thankfully not "massive hand-waving". Mainstream geophysical deterministic chaos science is not as bad as you make out.