From the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) see the SOI below, now firmly in positive territory like in 2008. An animation of SST from the Navy follows.
Pacific Ocean in early stages of a La Niña event
Issued on Wednesday 21 July 2010 | Product Code IDCKGEWWOO
Tropical Pacific Ocean temperatures continued to cool over the past fortnight, and are now approaching levels typical of a La Niña. Similarly, other ENSO indicators are also at or exceeding La Niña thresholds. As computer models predict the central Pacific will continue to cool over the coming months, it is now highly likely that the Pacific is in the early stages of a La Niña event, and that 2010 will be considered a La Niña year.
Signs of an emerging La Niña event have been apparent in the equatorial Pacific for several months. Pacific Ocean temperatures have cooled steadily throughout the year and are now more than 1°C cooler than average in some areas on the equator. The Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) has increased in value and is currently around +14, trade winds continue to be stronger than average and cloudiness has remained suppressed over the central Pacific. All of these key indicators are at levels typical of the early stages of a La Niña event.
La Niña periods are usually, but not always, associated with above normal rainfall during the second half of the year across large parts of Australia, most notably eastern and northern regions. Night time temperatures are typically warmer than average and Tropical Cyclone risk for northern Australia increases during the cyclone season (November-April).
=====================================
Here is the U.S. Navy animation of SST’s (patience while it loads). Note the cool blue on the right off the SA coast. Temperature scale in °C.
h/t’s to WUWT readers Geoff Sharp and Amino Acids in Meteorites
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What exactly would the “normal” temperature be?
Bill Illis says: “There is still a lot of warmer than average ocean water on the northern side of the Equator which extends below the surface at some locations. ”
Do you have a link to the data or visuals of this? Based on the location you described, it sounds like a Rossby wave.
Bill Illis: As Emily Litella used to say, “Never mind.”
The Rossby wave that heralded the start of the La Nina happened months ago. It’s visible in the following animation, as are the lingering pockets of warm water you described:
http://i32.tinypic.com/acan14.jpg
Bob Tisdale: I’m using lots of different sources for this since there are some differences between sources.
But here is a good site which allows one to actually use the data from the TAO/Triton bouys for different cross-sectional depths.
http://tao.noaa.gov/refreshed/sectionPlots.php?type=5day&sec=depth&var=temp
For example, there is quite a bit of warmer than average water below the surface at 110W pushing in (or being pulled in) from the North. This is an important depth for the ENSO as it eventually circulates up to the surface and enters the surface circulation to the West.
http://tao.noaa.gov/styles/images/latdepth/5day/110W_temp_yz_hf_20100720.png
http://ocean.dmi.dk/satellite/index.uk.php
SST and anomalies: I am confused about the “reality” of the anomalies. The west side of Greenland shows an SST of 5-7*C, while the anomaly is 4-5*, presumably meaning that the “normal” SST at July 10 is 1 – 2*C. That is the temperature associated with the edge of melting ice, as seen in various images. So western Greenland is not melting directly into the ocean, where the glacial ice has to be at 0*C, but its inland glaciers are giving of huge volumes of +10*C water to the sea – such a warmth is necessary to get the mixture up by 4-5*C.
What would the world SST look like if the government “anomaly” maps were subtracted from the government SST maps? Would we see bizarre things? The anomalies are mathematical creations, whereas the SSTs are hard data. Would the “normal” SST look, in fact, normal? Would it make sense?
I’m still trying to figure out what a global 0.7*C temperature rise means. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a global “normal” temperature map and a global anomaly map that, added up, gives 0.7*C as a global rise. That would show where the rise is from, but still wouldn’t say which season/month/day/night created it. Has anyone got these maps?
Anyone have a link to such a thing?
“Why not just show the total area measured?”
Regarding sea ice.
Probably because if you did that, the differences would look tiny, just like with temperatures.
One ‘feature’ of the anomaly presentation is that is removes seasonal variations. Some would cal that a bug, not a feature.
It has been absolutely crystal clear La Nina for 2.5 solid months now.
Re PIOMAS & Scott B:
— Surprise ! Piomas “corrected” June 18 to 11,300 (much as JAXA often corrects the previous day, see below)
– – so forget my Piomas figures above.
Piomas Anomaly fell from what we Thought it read in June, that is: 10,700 … to 10,600 km3
— Scott – – When I see Piomas, I see an “inconvenient Anomaly” as I WANT the REAL Ice Volume when I cite PIOMAS – – so I superimposed their Current Chart on their Comparison Chart with Icesat (you have to scale it @89%), Result
Their -14,200 = ZERO ICE LEFT (but at the September Minimum).
So -10,600 = 3,600 left, >>ASSUMING<< an average Melt from now on.
For comparison ICESAT's minimum reading was 6,000 km3 (Actual, not Anomaly) in November 2007, which I make = a 5,050 km3 SEPTEMBER Minimum, by subtracting Piomas's Sept-November gains from 6,000. Icesat was an EXACT Measure. Piomas "assimilates" SOME exact measures and Usually it spot-on equals the Laser Measurements … BUT as there are (usually) no measurements in the Central area, so the one time — 2007 — there was melt near the Pole – – it got pretty far off – – 7300 in November = 1300 km3 High. Thus the apparent "Drop" to 2009 – – if one corrects the 2007 Piomas reading, Volume gained 15% from 5050 in Sept. 2007, to 5800 in 2009.
Thanx for bugging me into Checking.
Daily: ___________2007_________2010__ ( JAXA Ice Extent data)
July18-19 ______ – 63,907 _____ – 108,906……..was 100K prelim.
July19-20 ______ – 92,187 _____ – 109,213…….was 131,719preliminary
July20-21 ______ – 103,438 _____ – 60,156 million km2
Behind 2007 by 429,532, ahead of 2009 by 253,437, ahead of 2006 by 148,593
PS: Re Doug Proctor: MANY more options at this Sea-temp site including "Change in Anomaly" (change squared ?). http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/maproom/.Global/.Ocean_Temp/Weekly_Anomaly.html
PPS F. Ross: “normal” varies with EVERY Chart. Usually they say, e.g. “1979-2000 mean” , but Piomas uses 1979-2009. User Beware !
@ur momisugly AleaJactaEst
Actually, the Daily Telegraph (but not the Sunday Telegraph) has been pro-AGW for some years, with very biased and one-sided reporting. However, since Climategate their reporting became more balanced. But now they seem to be reverting to type, reporting endless ‘everything is caused by climate change’ nonsense without mentioning the other side of the story.
Yesterday I emailed them about the NOAA report, but they won’t print it. I’ve appended it below.
Chris
*********************************************
Email to Daily Telegraph:
It’s sad to see the NOAA abandoning science for propaganda.
NOAA know that the recent warming is caused by a very strong el
Nino, which is now receding. They know that global temperatures are
likely to fall sharply in the second half of the year. Otherwise, why
make claims about a record year when there are still five months to
go? The NOAA temperature map is badly flawed. Many points
showing high temperatures cover areas where no surface temperature
data is actually available. For many points that do have data that can
be checked, the warming shown on the map is much larger than the
actual data. The phrase ‘hiding the decline’ comes to mind. In a
Climategate email a senior climate scientist bemoans the fact that
they can’t explain the lack of global warming.
Since July 1st the Arctic ice has recovered significantly, though it’s
still low compared to 30 years ago. The graph looks like ice extent
has reached a minimum and will probably recover over coming years,
just as it did after a similar minimum in the 1920’s. Arctic
temperatures are currently about two degrees below normal.
Antarctic ice extent has been steadily increasing over the last few
decades, so that the global average has been remarkably stable for
many years.
When you take the trouble to actually look at the data, a completely
different picture emerges. Despite all the global warming hysteria
and propaganda, the world is actually in pretty good shape. The world
is producing more food per head than ever before, the global average
life span is still increasing and the overall intensity of hurricanes has
been steadily falling over recent decades. Ironically, the hurricane
data that shows this decline comes from the NOAA itself.
Ref – Chris Wright says:
July 22, 2010 at 3:19 am
_______________________
Sometimes a few well chosen words can move mountains, more frequently you need a shovel and a lot of free time. Usually, none of us will ever live long enough to move a mountain with a shovel. I doubt there are enough like you, who really care, willing to pester the Daily Telegraph into correcting their errors before they go the way of all folly. Oh well! I guess it was just meant to be this way. Nice try.