Temperatures during the past decade have been the highest recorded
Last year was tied for the second warmest year since modern temperature record keeping began, and was the hottest in the southern hemisphere, according to a new analysis for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Reaffirming the warming trend, NASA confirmed that globally, temperatures during the past decade have been the highest recorded, although the agency noted that accurate instrumentation to chart weather and climate patterns only became widely available in 1880.
In that time, average global temperatures have risen about 1.4 degrees F. (0.8 C), according to the agency. Almost half that increase has occurred in the past 30 years, after a lull in the middle of the 20th Century.
The new analysis was performed at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City. In a statement released by NASA, institute Director James Hansen said the data contradict some widely publicized doubts about global warming.
"In the last decade, global warming has not stopped," he said.
Global temperatures during 2009 were fractionally lower than 2005, the hottest overall year on record, according to the report. Last year's heat tied several other years from 1998 to 2007 in the rankings.
In the NASA statement, Hansen said it is more important to look at the trend that at any given year, when variable climate cycles can skew the data.
"There's substantial year-to-year variability of global temperature caused by the tropical El Niño-La Niña cycle," Hansen said. "But when we average temperature over five to 10 years, we find that global warming is continuing unabated."
Another Goddard climatologist, Gavin Schmidt, called the focus on annual numbers a distraction. Such short-term measurements amount to "noise," while the crucial information is the longer trend, he said.
That argument serves a political purpose as well as a scientific one. During the past year, American commentators who question global warming have pointed out that 1998 average temperatures were higher than those in 2008.
But those opinions omit a key fact, since 2008 was a time of strong cooling in the Pacific Ocean, which is susceptible to the surface water current cycles known as El Nino and La Niña. La Niña occurs when upwelling cold water spreads west in the Pacific from the coast of Peru. It tends to depress temperatures.
A La Niña phase ended early in 2009, replaced in the fall by an El Niño effect, which is caused when warm water spreads from the same area off Peru. Scientists predict it will continue this year. If that holds true, NASA said the Goddard group expects 2010 to be the hottest year on record.
Another reason for that projection is that last year's hot weather came in the face of a slight drop in energy output from the sun. Periods when there are few sunspots normally produce a fractional cooling in earthly temperatures.
"In 2009, it was clear that even the deepest solar minimum in the period of satellite data hasn't stopped global warming from continuing," Hansen said.
— JOE TYRRELL, NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
Twitter
Myspace
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/climategate_cru_was_but_the_ti.html
Also if one looks at the data processing notes - they make use of Hadley data for the period 1880-11/1981 (for sea temps). Hadley as in CRU - hmm.
I also do not see mention of how they track the error rate or confidence in the final measurements - there is so much averaging/merging/selecting and tweaking going on I'm surprised how they come up with anything anybody can sensibly use...
Back to the drawing board time I think.
I don't blame ex-Journalism majors (and similar folk) for being scientifically illiterate. Most every one of the ones I knew in college all those decades ago (and I had a column in the school newspaper) scrupulously avoided courses in the "hard sciences."
If Joe Tyrell has any formal training at all in any of the sciences, it doesn't show. He's obviously accepted Dr. Hansen's bilge as if it were valid, relying upon the man's credentials and the fact that Dr. Hansen is on the government's payroll.
Bad idea.
I strongly recommend to Mr. Tyrell that he make use of more robust and reliable information freely available online, particularly with regard to understanding the doctored character of the database upon which Dr. Hansen claims to base his utterly bogus pronouncements.
Dr. Hansen has a clearly evident political agenda to push, and does not cavil at lying himself blind to thrust that agenda down America's throat. Mr. Tyrell is under some obligation - as a professional - to filter the utterances of scum like Dr. Hansen for congruence with factual reality, and the Internet makes this relatively easy.
Especially in the wake of the Climategate leaks (and subsequent pulls under Freedom of Information Act inquiries opening the choked cesspool that holds the corrupted NASA GISS datasets), it must be obvious to Mr. Tyrell that the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) alarmists are a pack of flagrant liars.
Dr. Hansen prominent among 'em.
I direct Mr. Tyrell's attention to:
1) http://wattsupwiththat.com/
2) http://www.climatedepot.com/
3) http://climateaudit.org/
...for general information on this specific subject, with frequent updates. Other easily accessible sources include:
4) http://rps3.com/Pages/Burt_Rutan_on_Climate_Change.htm
5) http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/
6) http://www.isthereglobalwarming.com/
Share and enjoy.
--
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=518890
and
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2010/01/23/are-the-folks-at-noaa-and-nasa-global-warming-coconspirators.php
The religious climate change fanatics will stop at nothing, and in doing so condemn themselves.
Why no one notices the snow-fall in Baghdad, Madrid, Buenos Aires and many places that haven't seen snow in decades. And here is Nasa Vs. US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado; According to which Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles (26 per cent) since 2007...
Its been predicted that the temperatures is going to kep on increasing and see what happenes?
"If organisations like NASA can't predict short-term weather, can we trust them with long term predictions?" Predictions as such the end of earth in 83 months due to global warming (as per www.onehundredmonths.com)...
But ofcourse, people at NatGeo don't know what they are talking about when they wonder if a lull sun can be the cause of cooling weather (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/05/090504-sun-global-cooling.html), or the russian scientist Khabibullo Abdusamatov who's betting at a mini Ice Age (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1958316/posts)....
Ofcourse what NASA says is right... it always has been......
The analysis of NASA data from the finally released freedom of infomation requests show that NASA is prone to bias and selectively chooses data for its average. No stadardized set of procedures of subsequent audit is performed so no real credence can be given to this data other than to say this is Hansen's biased opinion.
Buying what james hansen is selling is akin to investing in Enron stock without any accounting rules or an independant audit. Look what happened there and look whats happening here.
My prediction, if popular support in the AGW theory goes lower NASA will release the hottest year ever next year irregardless of the weather!