I've also said clearly what I want. I am pointing out you've not provided it and challenged you to again.
Of course if you can't or don't wish to do so then that is your prerogative, but then you have no apparent science to back up what you say. Fine.
We can see that for what it is. Unsubstantiated opinion.
I would expect that if there is evidence that AMO, for example, could provide global warming impacts there would be some papers about that. And how that would relate to AGW would be of scientific interest and there would be papers on that. I've had a bit of a dig around and it was interesting. Happy for you to surprise me.
So far you've acknowledged, as I understand it, that you have no science to back two of your points, on sunspots and a atlantic/pacific oscillation double wammy. So we can understand that they are simply your opinion. Perhaps even opinions you've now abandoned.
