>Mid-May 2010 SST Anomaly Update

>NOTE: The weekly OI.v2 SST data is available in two periods through the NOAA NOMADS website, from November 1981 to 1989, and from 1990 to present. I’ve been providing these mid-month updates with graphs that include the full term of the second batch of data. It’s really impossible to tell from those graphs what has transpired over the past few weeks due to the length of the dataset, so I’ve added shorter-term graphs, beginning in 2004, to make the wiggles visible.



NINO3.4 SST anomalies for the week centered on May 19, 2010 show that central equatorial Pacific SST anomalies are below zero and continuing their decline. Presently they’re at -0.21 deg C, which is in ENSO-neutral levels.
NINO3.4 SST Anomalies
NINO3.4 SST Anomalies – Short-Term


Weekly Global SST anomalies are still elevated, but they may have peaked for this El Nino. They are starting to show signs of a drop in response to the decline in central equatorial Pacific temperatures, but the global weekly data is much too variable to tell for sure.
Global SST Anomalies
Global SST Anomalies – Short-Term


OI.v2 SST anomaly data is available through the NOAA NOMADS system:

About Bob Tisdale

Research interest: the long-term aftereffects of El Niño and La Nina events on global sea surface temperature and ocean heat content. Author of the ebook Who Turned on the Heat? and regular contributor at WattsUpWithThat.
This entry was posted in SST Update. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to >Mid-May 2010 SST Anomaly Update

  1. d says:

    >Well done Bob. http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/BTW, have you seen the latest OHC rendition from Willis et al? Talk about a hockey stick!My impression is in reality they don't know what the data is telling us. This appears to be confirmation bias in the extreme, IMO.

  2. Bob Tisdale says:

    >d: You asked, "have you seen the latest OHC rendition from Willis et al?"I assume you're referring to Lyman et al, where Willis was part of the group. I wish I knew more about the 14 datasets they used to come up with their mean, so that we'd have a better idea which of them could be excluded, and why the earlier global OHC datasets (0-700m) don't rise as much.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s