Another paper blames ENSO for global warming pause, calling it '… a major control knob governing Earth's temperature.'

“Bob Tisdale who has been the lone voice in the wilderness for over a decade on this”
Not the lone voice but certainly the most industrious and influential voice as regards ENSO.
I think Bob has avoided stretching the thermal effects of the ENSO phenomenon to longer multidecadal periods of time and so far as I know does not propose solar influences affecting the changing relative dominance of El Nino and La Nina over successive positive and negative phases of the Pacific Multidecadal Oscillation ( PMO – not PDO which latter is merely an artefact of surface pressure differentials).
It is that changing longer term relative dominance between El Nino and La Nina over centuries that gives upward stepping from one positive phase of the PMO to the next (LIA to Current Warm Period) and, presumably downward stepping from one negative phase to the next ( MWP to LIA).
That longer term relative dominance on a multidecadal and centennial timescae is what appears to be linked to solar activity with the shorter term interannual ENSO oscillation itself being merely an internal system phenomenon with no necessary long term thermal implications.

could someone please head over to the septic science blog,and advise them over the implications of the paper.even the authors seem to be pushing it supports cAGW in some way.
my own personal opinion after reading many abstracts on climate related subjects recently is very little credence should be given to any of them.
the fact a layman can see glaring errors and inconsistences in most of them suggests if there were active research going on by unbiased scientists ,the rebuttals of these papers would severely out number the papers themselves.
the utter garbage assumption written about supposed ocean acidification (largely model based as usual ) is the current cause of my current state of near apoplexy 🙂
instead of performing ice smashing rescues,the admiral makarov should be dropping off a whole bunch of pseudo scientists including the septic science team to commiserate with the pair of french idiots that believed the hype about arctic ice melt and require rescuing,at someone elses expense.

sorry forgot to add reference link to discussion between papers authors and judith curry.
http://www.staatvanhetklimaat.nl/2013/08/30/xie-reacts-on-curry/

Here is the Introduction to my paper:
1. INTRODUCTION
The El Niño/La Niña–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a quasi-periodic climate pattern
in the sea-surface temperatures (SST) and sea-levels of the tropical Pacific Ocean that
takes place roughly once every three to seven years [1], [2], [3]. The IPCC AR4 WG1
report [2] readily accepts that ENSO events involve large exchanges of heat between
the ocean and atmosphere that have an effect upon global mean temperature.
An El Niño event occurs whenever the sea-surface temperature anomaly in the zone
of the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean referred to as Niño 3.4 [extending from 5 S to
5 N and 120 W to 170 W] is ≥ +0.5 °C for a period longer than seven to nine months
[1], [4], [5]. These events are considered to be an abnormal state of the ENSO [1]. In
contrast, a La Niña event occurs whenever the sea-surface temperature anomaly in the
Niño 3.4 zone is ≤ -0.5 °C for a period longer than seven to nine months [1], [4], [5].
These events are considered to be an exaggerated state of the ENSO neutral phase [1].
The PDO index is defined as the leading principal component of the North Pacific
monthly sea-surface temperature variability north of 20N latitude, for the period from
1900-93 [6], [7]. The PDO resembles a long-lived El Niño/La Niña-like pattern in the
sea-surface temperatures of the North Pacific Ocean [8], [9], [10], [11]. Long-term
observations indicate that it is characterized by positive and negative phases. During,
its positive phase, sea-surface temperatures are unusually warm in the Eastern
Equatorial/Tropical Pacific, while they are unusually cold in the far Northern Pacific
Ocean. In contrast, during its negative phase, the reverse is true.
Some [1], [12], [13] have argued that the PDO is a low [temporal] frequency
residual of random changes in ENSO activity on multi-decadal timescales. Indeed,
Power et al. [13] have used simple stochastic AGM models with built-in non-linear
climate processes (e.g. the integrating effect of upper ocean mixing layers in the North
Pacific) to show that the PDO can appear to modulate ENSO tele-connections with
other climate systems, even if the PDO itself largely reflects unpredictable random
changes in the relative frequency and/or strength of El Niño and La Niña events over
inter-decadal timescales [14].
This paper argues that the IPCC needs to consider the possibility that the relative
frequency and/or strength of El Niño and La Niña events is not random on interdecadal
timescales but that it is significantly influenced by long-term Lunar
atmospheric tides.
In section 2, we investigate the claim by Wilson [15] , Tisdale [1], and subsequently
by de Freitas and McLean [16], that much of the observed changes in the global mean
temperatures during the 20th century can be explained by changes in the relative
frequency and/or strength of El Niño compared to La Niña events. In section 3, we
discuss the results of Wilson and Sidorenkov [24] that shows that there is a large N=4
longitudinal standing wave-like pattern in the mean sea-level pressure (MSLP)
anomalies of the Earth’s Southern Hemisphere that is propagating around the Earth
from east to west, once every 18 years. Wilson and Sidorenkov [24] claim that this
standing wave-like pattern is associated with long-term lunar atmospheric tides that
are being driven by either the 18.0 year Saros cycle or the 18.6 year lunar Draconic
cycle. They propose that interaction between this propagating standing wave-like
pattern in the MSLP and the semi-permanent South Pacific sub-tropical high is
498 Energy & Environment · Vol. 24, No. 3 & 4, 2013
responsible for the observed changes in the relative frequency and/or strength of El
Niño events compared to La Niña events. Finally, in section 4 the conclusions are
discussed.
The IPCC now recognizes that the apparent modulation of ENSO events by the
PDO significantly modifies regional tele-connections around the Pacific Basin in such
a way that they affect the evolution of the global mean temperature on inter-decadal
timescales [2]. They also acknowledge that long-term changes in global surface
temperature caused by the PDO/ENSO phenomenon considerably complicate the
process of identifying and quantifying that part of the global mean temperature
increase that is caused by anthropogenic factors [2]. Hence, it of the utmost
importance to determine the mechanism that is responsible for these changes.

This ‘relative dominance’ aspect is not new.
“The ENSO (El Nino Southern Oscillation) Cycle has been heavily investigated for many years but seems to be looked at as a freestanding phenomenon that just redistributes heat around the globe, sometimes warming and sometimes cooling.
I think that is wrong. I believe that ENSO switches from warming to cooling mode depending on whether the sun is having a net warming or net cooling effect on the Earth. Thus the sun directly drives the ENSO cycle and the ENSO cycle directly drives global temperature changes. Indeed, the effect appears to be much more rapid than anyone has previously believed with a measurable response occurring within a few years of a change in solar energy input. Indeed I see some evidence for the proposition that for various reasons cooling occurs faster than warming but I will save that for another time.
It was no coincidence that during the years from 1975 to 2000 we had a strong emphasis on El Nino with warming-also known as a period of positive Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), and now, with an emphasis on La Nina we have cooling or at least a stall in the warming (a period of negative PDO).
As regards the Pacific Decadal Oscillation that is simply a periodical change in the predominance either of El Nino (positive mode) or of La Nina (negative mode). El Nino events can occur in a positive PDO mode and vice versa.
I believe that both ENSO and PDO are manifestations of the same process and are directly driven by shifts in the balance of heat output from the sun as it switches to or from net warming and to or from net cooling effects on the Earth.”
from here:
http://www.newclimatemodel.com/global-warming-and-cooling-the-reality/
originally published 2008 at climaterealists.com
Though now I would say that the change in relative dominance of El Nino / La Nina is attributable not to solar power output per se but to the way atmospheric chemistry involving ozone changes so as to affect global cloudiness and albedo.
The idea of relative dominance of El Nino / La Nina being carried across successive Pacific Multidecadal Oscillations over centuries as a result of solar influences is I think new and unique to me but I will stand corrected if someone else can be shown to have said it sooner.

This 2009 WUWT thread from Bob Tisdale is highly pertinent:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/28/misunderstandings-about-the-pacific-decadal-oscillation/
especially my post thus:
Stephen Wilde says:
April 29, 2009 at 9:56 am
“I think this is still skating round the issue.
That issue is whether the ENSO cycle is sufficient on it’s own to account for observations without requiring any separate input from independent oceanic variations.
From the links provided I get the impression that there is doubt and that there are differences of opinion on the matter.
For my part I cannot envisage there being no independent input from ocean variability.
Nor can I see how ENSO variability alone could give rise to phase shifts at 30 year intervals with a complete cycle of twice that.
It seems to me that the logical solution is that ENSO contributes air induced variations over short periods of time, separate oceanic cycles contribute their own independent variations over longer periods of time and the general underlying trend is dependent on slow long term changes in solar output over many solar cycles.
On that basis one can explain the short term climate consequences of individual El Nino and La Nina events, the 30/60 year longer term variations in the dominance of El Nino and La Nina and also the slow rise in global air temperatures since the little ice age.
Indeed, one can also account for the stepped upward temperature movement when each positive longer term oscillation leaves the air temperatures a little higher than the one before as during the 20th Century.
Now if the sun were to go into a long term cooling trend (albeit very slow) then I would expect to see stepped downward temperature movements develop but it would take two more 30 year phase shifts for that to become apparent.
In the meantime a coincidence of weaker solar cycles and negative oceanic phases (especially if in all the oceans at the same time) would be capable of giving us a large a downward shift in temperatures as we saw a large upward shift in temperatures during the recent warming when we had both a more active sun and positive oceanic phases.
‘Large’ being a relative term of course. I’m quite sure that natural forcings can do far more than our records to date have ever noted.”

I truly enjoy these papers stating that cooling in the Tropical Pacific, more La Nina events, are responsible for the pause (or dare I say a reversal) in Global Warming. However, it this were true wouldn’t the opposite also be true, that more El Nino events would be responsible for Global Warming.

The ENSO is, indeed, a very important process impacting Earth’s climate.
But it does not have an accumulating impact or step changes. An El Nino or a La Nina phase only lasts for 3 months to 12 months at a time. After which, the opposite phase often occurs.
The ENSO provides its impact on an continuous basis with a 3 month lag with no accumulation. All of the major atmospheric processes including water vapor, OLR, temperatures, cloud cover, precipitation, follow this pattern.
Now there can be a little extra impact (just a small amount) when there is a series of El Ninos or La Ninas in a row. But there are only 3 or 4 short periods when this has occurred – (1906-1911), (1939-1944), (1974-1979) (perhaps 1987-1998).
This paper does not go far enough back into the temperature history to see this.
So this chart below is the actual Nino 3.4 Index going back to 1871 (let me know if you find periods which provide a multi-decadal trend). It is up and down so fast, it does not result in long periods of warming or cooling.
http://s12.postimg.org/t38c0hril/Nino_3_4_1871_2013.png
If one wants to ascribe longer cycle impacts, one needs to move to the AMO 30 year up and down cycle (or the PDO which is not that good at representing the temperature history but is used by some).