DeclinetoState
02-02-2006, 12:45 AM
More about James Hansen:
"Nine of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 1995."
—Statement issued Monday by NOAA
A widely reported study last week said 2005 was the warmest on record. But headlines failed to note that the results were not concrete and a new study out this week challenges the findings.
Whatever the outcome, scientists say it is all moot: Last year was surprisingly warm and the record will fall soon enough.
The latest result came Monday from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), which is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). These are the folks that run the National Weather Service. Their study concludes that the global temperature in 2005 can't be statistically distinguished from the record set in 1998.
Last year was a warm year at Earth's surface, especially considering the lack of a heat-producing El Nino, but for now experts do not agree whether it was a record.
Mixed results
Last week, The Associated Press and others reported (http://www.livescience.com/environment/ap_060124_2005_temp.html) that a NASA scientist said 2005 was the warmest year on record, nosing out 1998.
Lost in many of the headlines, however, was this quote from the report's lead researcher, James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies: "We couldn't say with 100 percent certainty that it's the warmest year, but I'm reasonably confident that it was."
Hansen looked at different data in different ways compared to the NOAA team. The NASA study considered in particular data from the Arctic, which is warming faster (http://www.livescience.com/environment/050823_ice_free.html) than the rest of the planet. And for the latter part of 2005 both reports relied on preliminary data, so the analyses could change.
In an email interview yesterday, Hansen reiterated his caveat.
More at http://www.livescience.com/environment/060201_temperature_differences.html
"Nine of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 1995."
—Statement issued Monday by NOAA
A widely reported study last week said 2005 was the warmest on record. But headlines failed to note that the results were not concrete and a new study out this week challenges the findings.
Whatever the outcome, scientists say it is all moot: Last year was surprisingly warm and the record will fall soon enough.
The latest result came Monday from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), which is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). These are the folks that run the National Weather Service. Their study concludes that the global temperature in 2005 can't be statistically distinguished from the record set in 1998.
Last year was a warm year at Earth's surface, especially considering the lack of a heat-producing El Nino, but for now experts do not agree whether it was a record.
Mixed results
Last week, The Associated Press and others reported (http://www.livescience.com/environment/ap_060124_2005_temp.html) that a NASA scientist said 2005 was the warmest year on record, nosing out 1998.
Lost in many of the headlines, however, was this quote from the report's lead researcher, James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies: "We couldn't say with 100 percent certainty that it's the warmest year, but I'm reasonably confident that it was."
Hansen looked at different data in different ways compared to the NOAA team. The NASA study considered in particular data from the Arctic, which is warming faster (http://www.livescience.com/environment/050823_ice_free.html) than the rest of the planet. And for the latter part of 2005 both reports relied on preliminary data, so the analyses could change.
In an email interview yesterday, Hansen reiterated his caveat.
More at http://www.livescience.com/environment/060201_temperature_differences.html