Without this data, one could easily have drawn the exactly wrong conclusion from
the dip in sea level during the 2010 - 2011 La Nina.
La Niña events — the counterpart to El Niños, featuring colder than normal tropical Pacific waters — caused
dips in sea levels.
Fortunately, we've got great tools like the GRACE satellite that can tell us exactly where the water from the ocean went during
the dip in sea levels of 2011.
Short - term
dips in sea level mean nothing.
But it is also worth mentioning that adjusting for La Nina episodes merely smooths the very short term
dips in the sea level curve, and likewise, adjusting for El Ninos would smooth the less pronounced spikes.
Not exact matches
So, one could adjust only for La Ninas, only for El Ninos, for both, or make no adjustment at all, and
in all cases the effect on the apparent rate of
sea level rise would be close to nil so long as one isn't cherry picking temporary
dips or spikes at the outside ends, or at the junction, of the two periods one wishes to compare.
You would see
in geological record (more likely) division of Secondary PEAK and
DIP by
SEA LEVEL alterations, as TURBULENCE leaves few traces otherwise that would survive till NOW.
This could explain why this year the growth of the Antarctic
sea ice cover, which currently is headed toward its yearly maximum extent and was at much higher than normal
levels throughout much of the first half of 2015,
dipped below normal
levels in mid-August.
By contrast,
in 2010 and 2011, a persistent
dip in the jet stream brought a stronger southwesterly flow of air at upper
levels of the atmosphere along the East Coast, which helped turn many storms out to
sea before reaching landfall.