So, TemplarKomac, do you now understand that failing to prove that something is false does not prove - or even provide evidence - that it is true.
No. Because claiming there's a "97% consensus" or that "100+ nations agree on climate change" does not constitute as "evidence." So the failure is yours, Crick.
1) My comment was an attempt to introduce you to some of the more basic rules of logic. I think perhaps my choice of the term "failing" was a mistake as it has allowed you to make an incorrect assumption. I was not speaking of attempting but failing to make a proof, I was speaking of doing nothing at all. I sit here watching TV and nothing else. I have failed to prove that tides do not drive ENSO. That (my sitting on the couch) does not prove that tides DO drive ENSO. It proves nothing at all.
2) The 97% consensus and that all national science organizations accept AGW and that more than 194 nations have signed on to Paris's COP-21 accords, ARE evidence that AGW is real and all for the same reason. They indicate that a very large proportion of the experts who can be safely assumed to have examined the detailed, scientific evidence, find that evidence sufficient.
3) The consensus issue has no bearing one way or the other on the rules of logic.
There are an infinite number of statements that have not been falsified.
Again, these have no bearing on the rules of logic. However, that second one should have been brought up in the thread "Where's the Confession".
Not having proved that the ENSO cycle is NOT driven by tidal motion (which no one has ever even suggested) does not prove that it is, or even that it might be.
Think about this, there are many factors involved which move the water. Air currents, atmospheric pressure, planetary rotation and etc. Moving the water can do lots of things, most namely alter the temperature.
Tidal motion DOES heat the world's oceans. But, as I think Old Rocks pointed out, it's been doing so on a diurnal basis for a very long time. Nothing has changed in those cycles that would cause heat to accumulate deep in the western Pacific. The tides do NOT cause ENSO. Period.
The moon is 1/3 the size of Earth
Did you get past geometry? The radius (diameter, circumference of the moon is 0.273 times the Earth's, so closer to a fourth than a third. But that makes it's volume (and thus its approximate mass) 2% of the Earth's (actually 1.23%).
and you're going to sit there and tell me it has no effect on the ENSO? With all that gravitation exertion? If the moon can cause tides, just imagine what it would do to ENSO.
You ARE funny. Yes, I am going to tell you that the moon, which causes our tides, does not cause ENSO. If you're not convinced, why don't you try to explain to us the difference between the tides that cause the el Nino and the tides that cause the la Nina. Are they going in different directions?
You might also ask yourself - if that tidal effect is so obvious and irrefutable - how the actual experts missed it.