2012 ENSO Thread

[GaWx]

**Bulletin from NOAA**

I just got off of the phone with Michelle at NOAA. She's trying to get the weekly ENSO update out by 10 AM. I asked her why there were asterisks initially instead of numbers. She said that there was "a bug in the data". The data has been rerun. So, they clearly think that OISST was erroneous. However, they're apparently not going to say anything about it in their update.

I'm going to attempt to get more info from Michelle soon. She was too busy to give me any details a few minutes ago because she was trying to get the update out.

Edit: I couldn't have written a better script than this. Truth is often stranger than fiction!!

[SoCoWx]

**Bulletin from NOAA**

I just got off of the phone with Michelle at NOAA. She's trying to get the weekly ENSO update out by 10 AM. I asked her why there were asterisks initially instead of numbers. She said that there was "a bug in the data". The data has been rerun. So, they clearly think that OISST was erroneous. However, they're apparently not going to say anything about it in their update.

I'm going to attempt to get more info from Michelle soon. She was too busy to give me any details a few minutes ago because she was trying to get the update out.

Edit: I couldn't have written a better script than this. Truth is often stranger than fiction!!

Ha! Reminds me of the December 26th, 2010 snowstorm, when, after the models had gone back the coastal storm solution, NOAA sent out bulletins everywhere saying that all the runs had initialization errors. LOL. Most likely just to cover themselves.

[Isotherm]

**Bulletin from NOAA**

I just got off of the phone with Michelle at NOAA. She's trying to get the weekly ENSO update out by 10 AM. I asked her why there were asterisks initially instead of numbers. She said that there was "a bug in the data". The data has been rerun. So, they clearly think that OISST was erroneous. However, they're apparently not going to say anything about it in their update.

I'm going to attempt to get more info from Michelle soon. She was too busy to give me any details a few minutes ago because she was trying to get the update out.

Edit: I couldn't have written a better script than this. Truth is often stranger than fiction!!

Wow, I've got to admire your passion for getting this thing up to nino status.

[Abract]

Wow, I've got to admire your passion for getting this thing up to nino status.

Don't think he is trying to. Just giving data as seen, and when it's widely different something ain't right somewhere.

[GaWx]

Don't think he is trying to. Just giving data as seen, and when it's widely different something ain't right somewhere.

I think he's joking. Thanks for the support, regardless.

To make sure there's no confusion, the released number, +0.5, is much cooler than what the OISST maps show for 11/11-17. If you look at the loop, 11/11-17 is WAY warmer than 11/4-10!! Per Harry per StormVista, these were the approximate numbers (all of these are in the ENSO thread) and they all look reasonable to me per my own eyes:

Days prior to 11/11: as low as +0.3, which were close to TAO, NOAA, etc.

Sun 11/11: nothing given but the warming had clearly already started on 11/11 per the loops

Mon 11/12: +0.9..so this is already ~0.6 warmer than a few days prior per Harry; one can see good warming again on this day per the loop

Tue 11/13: +1.0

Wed 11/14: +1.35...yes, sig. warming obvious on this day, too

Thu 11/15: +1.50

Fri 11/16: +1.40..slight cooling evident on loop

Sat 11/17: +1.30.." " " "

If I assume ~+0.6 for 1/11, I get +1.15 for the calendar week centered on 11/14.

Reminder: Michelle at NOAA told me that there was a bug in the OISST data. So, they are not using this OISST loop's very warm maps. That's why they said it was +0.5...+0.5 isn't based on these maps as they are. I don't know on what it is based except that she said "the data has been rerun" because of the bug. I'm going to try to talk to her again later as I mentioned to get a better understanding. As I've been saying, TAO, which I was using for my own estimates until last week, has been much cooler. Based on TAO, even I was about to give up on El Nino as per my posts. Also, look at my reply to Frivolous last night when I said that his link's loop looked unimpressive as far as warming is concerned and that based on it, alone, I'd just about say forget about El Nino. So, it is believable that OISST is too warm. However, I then have to wonder what kind of bug would cause such large errors in OISST.

Loop link:

http://www.esrl.noaa....anim.week.html

[GaWx]

Per the OISST loop, fwiw, 11/18 cooled some in 3.4 vs. 11/17. Harry said that 11/17 was ~+1.30. My guess is that 11/18 is ~+1.15-20. Let's see whether or not it makes it back down to near +0.3 to +0.4 by the end of this cooling since that's where the big warming started.

http://www.esrl.noaa....anim.week.html

[Deck Pic]

Per the OISST loop, fwiw, 11/18 cooled some in 3.4 vs. 11/17. Harry said that 11/17 was ~+1.30. My guess is that 11/18 is ~+1.15-20. Let's see whether or not it makes it back down to near +0.3 to +0.4 by the end of this cooling since that's where the big warming started.

http://www.esrl.noaa....anim.week.html

per SV it is 1.06

[NaoPos]

soo..whats the latest? do we have warming or an error in 3.4?

[GaWx]

soo..whats the latest? do we have warming or an error in 3.4?

Officially, the massive OISST warming was treated as an error as of this morning since NOAA went with only +0.5 in 3.4 after doing a rerun after they determined OISST had a bug of some sort per my telecon. I have since left another message but it has not been returned yet. So, I'll likely have no more info to add until my call is returned.

In the meantime, I do wonder what are the implications IF OISST data really is inaccurate and IF it wasn't just this past week's data that was tainted. What about weeks prior to this last one for ENSO? Also, I do know that the UWash PDO table has been using OISST data since around when it became available in 1982. So, what about the accuracy of the PDO index? Or is the problem localized in the ENSO regions for some odd reason?

Are there any other indices that use OISST? Are there any other uses for OISST? Is it used at all for Global Warming related SST measurements? Anyone know?

[Msalgado]

Weak Nino winters have been the coldest on average by a wide margin for much of the E US and especially for the SE US (an incredible 7 of 11 coldest Atlanta winters were during weak Ninos such as 1976-7 and 1977-8) ...colder than neutral positive on average (which is actually close to normal). The weak Ninos that followed Ninas have ben especially cold on average. So, if we get a -NAO/-AO and a +PDO, look out below! Even if we don't get the +PDO but do get the -NAO, cold prospects would still be good. Just not as good chancewise and intensitywise.

Look at it this way. If you tell me that there's going to be a -NAO/-AO and +PDO, that's quite good for cold prospects (as one might expect) for the E US absent a really strong Nina or Nino. Now, if you then say there's a weak Nino to go along with the -NAO/-AO and +PDO, that's even better. If you then say that this weak Nino just followed a Nina and there still is the -NAO/-AO and +PDO, that's the best combo to have for the best chance at a cold winter and even possibly a historically cold one in parts of the eastern US (examples: 1976-7, 1939-40, and 1904-5). That's like 7-7-7 on a slot machine for cold winters.

So, for the purpose of establishing the probablity of what kind of winter we'll have, it really is worth following and this is the thread for it. This is just like when people speculate on whether the NAO, AO, and PDO will be - or + and also with what magnitude.

Furthermore, the recent warming has been VERY impressive and, therefore, worthy of discussion since it could very well make a sig. difference for the upcoming winter. This is about as impressive a warming as has been seen within a week's time during oncoming Ninos of any strength. Very much newsworthy for ENSO geeks!

I'm currently working with a professor on some time series analysis on stream flow on major rivers in NM and ENSO / PDO conditions and while I don't write off the ENSO at all I definitely believe that the PDO is the primary issue for precip and cold winters here.

[The_Global_Warmer]

The esrl PSD page for the 18th looks well warmer than 0.5 for the Western ENSO regions.

[GaWx]

I'm currently working with a professor on some time series analysis on stream flow on major rivers in NM and ENSO / PDO conditions and while I don't write off the ENSO at all I definitely believe that the PDO is the primary issue for precip and cold winters here.

That's quite believable for the SW US. Even here in the SE US, it is quite important due to the partial correlation of the PDO and the PNA. ENSO, PDO, and NAO/AO are all important here. A DJF averaged +PDO is generally much better for prospects for a cold winter than a -PDO since a +PNA is usually colder than a -PNA.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Officially, the massive OISST warming was treated as an error as of this morning since NOAA went with only +0.5 in 3.4 after doing a rerun after they determined OISST had a bug of some sort per my telecon. I have since left another message but it has not been returned yet. So, I'll likely have no more info to add until my call is returned.

In the meantime, I do wonder what are the implications IF OISST data really is inaccurate and IF it wasn't just this past week's data that was tainted. What about weeks prior to this last one for ENSO? Also, I do know that the UWash PDO table has been using OISST data since around when it became available in 1982. So, what about the accuracy of the PDO index? Or is the problem localized in the ENSO regions for some odd reason?

Are there any other indices that use OISST? Are there any other uses for OISST? Is it used at all for Global Warming related SST measurements? Anyone know?

That thread has different sources in it.

[GaWx]

http://www.americanw...lobal-sst-maps/

That thread has different sources in it.

Friv, thanks for the link. Looking at OISST, one can clearly see how its warmth in Nino 3.4 sticks out. Nothing else is really close to as warm as it. Whereas it averaged ~+1.15 for last week, the other weekly maps all seem to be ~+0.5 to maybe +0.6. That tells me that the odds of OISST actually being correct are not great in retrospect. Also it having had such a rapid SST anom. increase last week looks suspect in comparison. Could it be that OISST is right and the others wrong? I suppose it is possible if the others are all based on the same data sources. Otherwise, the odds wouldn't seem to be in OISST's favor.

[Isotherm]

I think he's joking. Thanks for the support, regardless.

To make sure there's no confusion, the released number, +0.5, is much cooler than what the OISST maps show for 11/11-17. If you look at the loop, 11/11-17 is WAY warmer than 11/4-10!! Per Harry per StormVista, these were the approximate numbers (all of these are in the ENSO thread) and they all look reasonable to me per my own eyes:

Days prior to 11/11: as low as +0.3, which were close to TAO, NOAA, etc.

Sun 11/11: nothing given but the warming had clearly already started on 11/11 per the loops

Mon 11/12: +0.9..so this is already ~0.6 warmer than a few days prior per Harry; one can see good warming again on this day per the loop

Tue 11/13: +1.0

Wed 11/14: +1.35...yes, sig. warming obvious on this day, too

Thu 11/15: +1.50

Fri 11/16: +1.40..slight cooling evident on loop

Sat 11/17: +1.30.." " " "

If I assume ~+0.6 for 1/11, I get +1.15 for the calendar week centered on 11/14.

Reminder: Michelle at NOAA told me that there was a bug in the OISST data. So, they are not using this OISST loop's very warm maps. That's why they said it was +0.5...+0.5 isn't based on these maps as they are. I don't know on what it is based except that she said "the data has been rerun" because of the bug. I'm going to try to talk to her again later as I mentioned to get a better understanding. As I've been saying, TAO, which I was using for my own estimates until last week, has been much cooler. Based on TAO, even I was about to give up on El Nino as per my posts. Also, look at my reply to Frivolous last night when I said that his link's loop looked unimpressive as far as warming is concerned and that based on it, alone, I'd just about say forget about El Nino. So, it is believable that OISST is too warm. However, I then have to wonder what kind of bug would cause such large errors in OISST.

Loop link:

http://www.esrl.noaa....anim.week.html

Yeah - I was kidding around. You're one of the best posters on this board and your analysis is always interesting to me. Hopefully these SSTA conflicts can be ironed out soon. Don't these people know that millions of weenies' winters are at stake here??

In all seriousness, if there is an error and the region 3.4 reading for this week was say +0.8c/+0.9c for argument's sake, that would put us up to August 29th 2012 weekly's peak at +0.9c. A couple weeks following that value, we were back down to +0.3c in region 3.4. Point is that even if this week's numbers are up into that range, they likely will fall back to warm neutral (+0.4/+0.5c) within a couple weeks. SOI values remain well into positive territory, and there seem to be little impetus for future warming.

Regarding the PDO (this is slightly off topic the ENSO conversation), here's where we were Oct 28th:

Now - looks like some cooling in the GOA, north central Pac, and along the West Coast. Not significant cooling from Oct in those regions. West Pac looks similar. My guess would be around -1 now as opposed to the Oct -0.8 value.

[GaWx]

Yeah - I was kidding around. You're one of the best posters on this board and your analysis is always interesting to me. Hopefully these SSTA conflicts can be ironed out soon. Don't these people know that millions of weenies' winters are at stake here??

In all seriousness, if there is an error and the region 3.4 reading for this week was say +0.8c/+0.9c for argument's sake, that would put us up to August 29th 2012 weekly's peak at +0.9c. A couple weeks following that value, we were back down to +0.3c in region 3.4. Point is that even if this week's numbers are up into that range, they likely will fall back to warm neutral (+0.4/+0.5c) within a couple weeks. SOI values remain well into positive territory, and there seem to be little impetus for future warming.

Regarding the PDO (this is slightly off topic the ENSO conversation), here's where we were Oct 28th:

Now - looks like some cooling in the GOA, north central Pac, and along the West Coast. Not significant cooling from Oct in those regions. West Pac looks similar. My guess would be around -1 now as opposed to the Oct -0.8 value.

Isotherm,

Thanks! I'm surprised I'm not severely depressed right now lol. It is almost as if us weenies were intentionally teased by the evil OISST. What a long day!

I agree about the lack of help from the SOI. However, I was still hoping OISST was right because I know there have been times when the normal SOI/3.4 relationship didn't hold.

I agree about the PDO having fallen back some. Your -1 estimate seems reasonable. It may even be more like -1.25. Considering the +EPO pattern of recent weeks, it seems that the PDO held up rather well as opposed to crashing back down. That tells me if we can reattain a -EPO dominated period, perhaps we'd have a shot to get to a +PDO. For the first time in several weeks, the models do seem to bring on some periods of -EPO not too many days from now. Let's see if this helps the PDO to start another rise.

I do still wonder about the OISST problems' effects on the PDO calc.'s.

[wxmx]

A little clarification about OISST. What it has been referred here as OISST is actually AVHRR satellite measurements, which is only a part of OISST. Up until last year it also used AMSRE. It actually uses on site records, not sure if they are from the TAO array or not, blended with satellite measurements.

[GaWx]

A little clarification about OISST. What it has been referred here as OISST is actually AVHRR satellite measurements, which is only a part of OISST. Up until last year it also used AMSRE. It actually uses on site records, not sure if they are from the TAO array or not, blended with satellite measurements.

Thanks wxmx!

[The_Global_Warmer]

I remembered a link I found and used when I wanted to find more sources of SST's to see if last summers Beaufort Sea SST reading of 20C was valid.

Here is another source separate from AVHRR.

Here is the link to the source:

This image is from Nov 10th

This image is from the 19th:

I can't find an anomaly graphic but if you go through the images, you can clearly see some level of warming in the NINO 3+4 regions.

this explains the sources:

SPoRT Sea Surface Temperature Composite

The SPoRT SST Composite is blend of the MODIS, NESDIS¹ SST products (except over the Great Lakes, where it is a blend of the MODIS and REMSS² SST products). The algorithm uses a 7-day collection of MODIS level-2B data and the most recent NESDIS and REMSS daily products. Two type of weighting are used in the compositing process. One weight is for the data latency and the other for the product type. The MODIS data, being at 1-km resolution, is given the most weight. All available confidence flags and bias information is incorporated. In the compositing process the field is calculated on a 2-km grid from approximately 0N to 80N and 130E to 10E. The SPoRT SST Composite product is computed twice-daily (nighttime and daytime). The data are obtained in near-real time from the GHRSST archive at JPL.

¹ The National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) GOES/POES SST Composite uses satellite data from GOES and POES. This product has global coverage at approximately 9-km resolution and is generated once per day. Additional information can be found at the NESDIS site.

² The REMSS MW/IR/OI SST Composite in produced by Remote Sensing Systems (REMSS). The REMSS composite product is a combination of microwave, infrared and optimum interpolation data that provides greater coverage and higher accuracy than IR-only SSTs. It has global coverage at approximately 9-km resolution and is produced once per day. Additional information can be found at the REMSS site.

[GaWx]

Today's "AVHRR" map is clearly cooler in 3.4. This is all telling me that the major warmth seen here last week is becoming more and more irrelevant whether real or not. Therefore, the Nino chances are now on death's doorstep. They are now in the intensive care unit in guarded condition. The good doctor may very well be making an important pronouncement anytime now from my own perspective.

[SoCoWx]

Today's "AVHRR" map is clearly cooler in 3.4. This is all telling me that the major warmth seen here last week is becoming more and more irrelevant whether real or not. Therefore, the Nino chances are now on death's doorstep. They are now in the intensive care unit in guarded condition. The good doctor may very well be making an important pronouncement anytime now from my own perspective.

Very dramatic, you are.

[GaWx]

Very dramatic, you are.

This last week has been as dramatic as I've ever seen with regard to ENSO. That level of drama with regard to ENSO may not be repeated in my lifetime (I mean within just one week's time). I don't feel I'm being overly dramatic in saying that. What were the odds that the main contributor to the detemination of the weekly SST anomalies showed a sudden and major warming of record rapid proportions just after the time the Nino was being declared dead by several posters, that it apparently turned out to be due to a bug (I still want to get more details about this), and that this would occur during such a crucial time that it could make the difference between Nino and no Nino?

[jdrenken]

This last week has been as dramatic as I've ever seen with regard to ENSO. That level of drama with regard to ENSO may not be repeated in my lifetime (I mean within just one week's time). I don't feel I'm being overly dramatic in saying that. What were the odds that the main contributor to the detemination of the weekly SST anomalies showed a sudden and major warming of record rapid proportions just after the time the Nino was being declared dead by several posters, that it apparently turned out to be due to a bug (I still want to get more details about this), and that this would occur during such a crucial time that it could make the difference between Nino and no Nino?

My skeptism was due to the sub-surface showing warmth, but not extreme, migrating to the surface. If we saw 1.0/1.5 directly below the surface I would've believed it.

[Deck Pic]

Any attempts at Nino are currently being b-itch-slapped

[GaWx]

Folks,

Like it or not, it is now the right time for a very important announcement. I'd really appreciate it if the phasers were put away...I'm just trying to deliver a message. Nothing more, nothing less. This is not an easy thing to do.

[okie333]

Folks,

Like it or not, it is now the right time for a very important announcement. I'd really appreciate it if the phasers were put away...I'm just trying to deliver a message. Nothing more, nothing less. This is not an easy thing to do.

The phasers are not being put away... haven't you heard that "phasing" is the new "cutoff low"?

[WXeastern]

Folks,

Like it or not, it is now the right time for a very important announcement. I'd really appreciate it if the phasers were put away...I'm just trying to deliver a message. Nothing more, nothing less. This is not an easy thing to do.

Lol..that one looks familar

[GaWx]

Although I've given up on the Nino, I'm still following things. The SOI per my interp. of the 0Z Euro has what may turn out to be about the most negative period of SOI's since mid-Aug. lining up for 12/7-11.

Any opinions on how much the anticipated pattern change for the US near that timeframe may be connected?

[usedtobe]

Although I've given up on the Nino, I'm still following things. The SOI per my interp. of the 0Z Euro has what may turn out to be about the most negative period of SOI's since mid-Aug. lining up for 12/7-11.

Any opinions on how much the anticipated pattern change for the US near that timeframe may be connected?

I don't really know, the GLAAM is already high and with the SOI being strongly negative that implies to me a further spike in the GLAAM which typically is more associated with a nino type response than a nina which may be part of the reason the PNA is being forecdast to switch to positive on the latest ens mean. It also looks like the mouuntain torque is spiking again for what that is worth which plays a role in modulating the GLAAM, and intraseasonal variations of the AO and PNA. I'm not the best one to ask exactily how but it does look like the change in the pattern is going to be partly driven by the mountain torque spike and GLAAM.

http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/tcd/PREPRINTS/lrgfin.pdf

[Isotherm]

I don't really know, the GLAAM is already high and with the SOI being strongly negative that implies to me a further spike in the GLAAM which typically is more associated with a nino type response than a nina which may be part of the reason the PNA is being forecdast to switch to positive on the latest ens mean. It also looks like the mouuntain torque is spiking again for what that is worth which plays a role in modulating the GLAAM, and intraseasonal variations of the AO and PNA. I'm not the best one to ask exactily how but it does look like the change in the pattern is going to be partly driven by the mountain torque spike and GLAAM.

http://www.atmos.ucl...INTS/lrgfin.pdf

I would agree with your thoughts Wes. The increase in GLAAM and SOI decrease coincides w/ recent modelling projecting a much colder pattern evolving for the CONUS with blocking across the top. As you noted, a Nino type atmospheric response tends to be associated w/ the +GLAAM and -SOI. Maybe we can get the MJO into phase 8-1 in 10 days or so, which would further argue for the development of the blocking pattern and retrogression of the vortex SW from the GOA.