What I meant was: when the phrase "new global temperature record" is used, it isn't about the 28 year satellite temperature record; it's about the ~130 year (too lazy to search out the exact "official" length) surface instrumental record. Yes, I know there are flaws -- and corrections. Same goes for the MSU TLT. (Or do you think Wentz and Co. have it all figured out now?)
If you want the ENSO somewhat smoothed out but at the cost of opaque and questionable adjustments, go ahead and use your data. We'll see where we are in five years (presuming an El Nino will happen by then).
I expect the signal of a normal El Nino to rise well above the noise. The one thing of interest is that the PDO shift could mean that there won't be an El Nino over the next five years -- so either there will be a new global temperature record without one, or (as I expect, with no other support for that expectation other than "that's how nature works") the Pacific will still manage to foster an El Nino.
True and true. But the LT with its corrections depicts the 0.17C / decade trend plus ENSO. The signal of a normal El Nino will rise well above the noise (if you are correct that trend will continue. Why would you think the warming trend would not show up in LT but only in the surface measurements? If there is no El Nino within five years I will call it a tie except if we have a record without El Nino.