*** Predictibilidiad de los índices oceánicos

En cuanto a AMO. Aquí si que discrepo de el uso de ese índice. Pienso que es mejor tratar los datos en bruto, sin ninguna manipulación por una posible influencia del calentamiento global. 

Además al tratarse de una socilación multidecenal sugiero trabajar con datos anuales. Los mensulaes pueden meter mucho ruido.

Te propongo hagas lo mismo con:

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/treering/reconstructions/amo-gray2004.txt (reconstrucción 1500-1990)

y

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/data/correlation/amon.us.long.mean.data (datos reales 1856-actual)

Como siempre entraríamos en la posible controversia de la señal del calentamiento en AMO. Creo que es fácil de solventar:

1.- Utilizar solo la reconstrucción de SST hasta 1900 (1500-1900)

2.- Añadir los datos reales de SST hasta la actualidad (1500-actual)

Comparar ambas tanto en periodos como amplitudes. 

Estoy convencido de que el pico de 65-80-100 años será entonces una realidad palpable (así como un posible pico de 200 años, con dudas).

También creo que si existe una influencia manifiesta visible del calentamiento global en AMO saldrá a la luz al comparar ambas. 

Son sugerencias.

Saludos.

Muchas gracias por tus sugerencias, metragirta

Las tendré en cuenta.

La verdad es que es un tema complejo por eso que comentas, la posible doble dirección entre temperatura global y AMO. Por el ruido no te preocupes porque el programita que tego elimina muy bien el ruido, lo elimina tanto que a veces me fulmina algunas de las frecuencias principales, jejeje.

Tendréis noticias dentro de unos días. De momento he puesto los resultados provisionales que hice con los datos viejos.
Saludos

en este foro han hecho una relación bastante curiosa entre MEI y Tª
http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?s=491855d829fc0aa3416de6a6b88daaf2&showtopic=54851&pid=1522466&st=0&#entry1522466

In my opinion this suggests that the flat temperatures since 2002 are actually consistent with an accelerating global temperature trend in recent years that has been somewhat masked by the recent ENSO decline (similar to how pinatubo masked an otherwise warming trend). There doesn't seem to be any divergance between MEI and global temperature since 2002 like there was during the Pinatubo eruption period. There doesn't seem to be any obvious impact from solar minimum or from the negative PDO although of course either of those two could have caused the decline in MEI.

In any case if the relationship over previous decades is anything to go by it would take progressively stronger La Ninas at this point to stall temperature any futher, which seems unfeasible. So when we are already low and there's not much further to go, my guess is that it's more likely than not that we will shortly see a sudden and large step jump like we did from 2000 to 2002.

dejo una especulación sobre una posible relación sol-ENSO,

The Sun’s Influence on ENSO, Is There a Connection?

...
The above chart reveals several interesting results. Beginning with the start of a new cycle (left side of the graph), the frequency or probability of El Niño increases to 67% as the sunspot number increases to between 17 and 52. A plausible explanation is that during this period of increasing sunspots there is also a period of elevated solar activity and solar flares , which may provide pulses of energy that help initialize the climate patterns necessary for driving El Niño. As the solar cycle continues upward, La Niña becomes more probable (73%) once the number of sunspots reaches 52-94. This flip to La Niña is not directly caused by the solar cycle, but rather by the dynamics of the ENSO cycle. It has been well documented that a La Niña typically follows an El Niño as the eastward propagating Kelvin waves diminish and the easterly trade winds re-strengthen and restart the upwelling of cool subsurface water in the east Pacific.

Near the peak of the solar cycle, the probabilities of the ENSO phases are more equally distributed, with ENSO neutral becoming the preferred phase (probability near 50%). However, as solar activity diminishes and the elongated tail of the downward side of the cycle is encountered, the probability of La Niña again increases substantially (52-64%). Prolonged periods of solar inactivity are likely to decrease the amount of total insolation, and this could eventually drive ENSO into the cool phase. This effect was observed in 2007, 2008, and 2009 as back to back La Niña’s have occurred in the current elongated minimum portion of the solar cycle.
...

un vídeo sobre el episodio de Nov-97 

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a000200/a000287/a000287.mpg