The point is: It is statistically improper to use 1998 as a starting point for determining whether or not warming is happening. This is because 1998 was abnormally high and using it to determine whether a trend exists biases the result in favor of finding "no trend".
The further point of the article is that, regardless of what starting point is used, the calculated trends going back as long as 65 years result in finding that the climate models are almost certainly WRONG and predict warming that didn't happen.
If, for example, these computer climate models were used to predict the outcome of horse races, one would be tremendously better off betting against the models.
The El Nino temperature spike occurred because solar energy was leaving the ocean. The Oceans and the globe were giving up heat. That is proven by the drop in atmospheric temperatures that followed. Solar energy into Oceans equals global warming. Solar energy leaving Oceans equals gloval cooling. El Nino is when the globe cools. Silly apes. Physics is not for kids.