Dessler e-mail to Spencer on 1/10/11

Hello, Roy.

If you don't mind, I'm going to keep after you on one important point.

In these e-mails, we have discussed two hypotheses for the observed
lead/lag relation and decorrelation. My hypothesis is that all of the
observations are due to canonical ENSO physics --- not clouds causing
temperature changes. The fact that climate models get these relations
supports this, and it is consistent with the surface energy budget.

Your hypothesis --- clouds cause temperature changes --- has no
supporting data (beyond just the correlation & decorrelation) and it
is not consistent with the surface energy budget.

Here's my question: Why would anyone (including you) accept your
hypothesis when the mainstream view fits the data better.

I'm interested in your thoughts.

Thanks!