Abstract
<title>Abstract</title> <p>The El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon represents the primary mode of interannual climate variability on Earth, with profound implications for Ecuador. In recent decades, media-driven terms such as “Mega Niño”, “Super Niño”, or “Godzilla Niño” have proliferated in public communication and local policy debates, distorting scientific nomenclature for these extreme events. This perspective article critically examines modern instrumental and paleoclimate evidence to determine whether the thermal anomalies observed during 2026 constitute unprecedented behavior that justifies using such terms. We quantitatively analyze the monthly record of sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies from 1982 to June 2026 across four tropical Pacific regions (Niño 1 + 2, Niño 3, Niño 3.4, and Niño 4). Historical extremes reveal that the coastal Niño 1 + 2 region reached its maximum anomaly in June 1983 (+ 4.03°C), whereas Niño 3.4 peaked in November 2015 (+ 2.72°C). Multivariate similarity analyses indicate that the rapid warming transition observed during the first half of 2026 aligns closely with historical analogs from 2023, 1997, and 2015, corresponding to the onset of events classified as strong and very strong. These findings show that current anomalies are intense and serve as a crucial early warning signal, yet they remain within the previously observed range of climate variability and do not justify creating a new climate category. Based on instrumental, historical, and conceptual evidence, we argue that informal expressions such as “Mega Niño”, “Super Niño”, or “Godzilla Niño” can distort public risk perception. Therefore, we propose adopting NOAA's official intensity classification consistently across scientific and public domains.</p>