Print 85 comment(s) - last by PlasmaBomb.. on Jan 18 at 7:29 AM

NASA's temperature data shows 2010 to tie the record for the warmest year in recent (recorded)history.  (Source: NASA/GISS)

GISS's James Hansen   (Source: NASA)

  (Source: Northern Arizona University)
Record heat ties 2005 -- the previous hottest year on record

According to climatologists at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, 2010 was a very hot year.  While anyone who witnessed the Vikings Metrodome collapse [video] might not have seen this coming, NASA says that data from 1,000 climate stations shows 2010, as a whole, to be statistically tied for being the hottest year in recorded history [press release].

The man leading the report was infamous climatologist James Hansen, well-known as being Al Gore's climate advisor; for his claims that oil companies were committing "crimes against humanity" by doing business; and for receiving a $250,000 grant from a nonprofit run by the wife of Democratic Senator John Kerry. 

Hansen states in the report, "If the warming trend continues, as is expected, if greenhouse gases continue to increase, the 2010 record will not stand for long."

Much uncertainty remains, however.  NASA's data comes from 1000 meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea surface temperature, and Antarctic research station measurements.  But NASA must choose how to process that data when measurements conflict.  In the past, ground based stations have reportedly shown anomalous heating in select regions (such as Russia), but NASA chose to throw out or reduce the statistical significance of satellite measurements, which showed far cooler temperatures.

It is unknown if there are similar discrepancies in this year's temperatures, but one would hope that the data is carefully scrutinized by independent interests given Dr. Hansen's vested financial interest in showing the Earth is warming and mankind is causing it.

If the NASA data holds up, the average surface temperature in 2010 was 1.34 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the average temperature from 1951 to 1980.  Since the 1970s, NASA says statistics show the Earth to be warming 0.36 degrees Fahrenheit a decade.

2010 was within 0.018 degrees Fahrenheit of 2005, the previous record holder, earning it a tie.  In a tie for third place are 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007 and 2009.  NASA says its analysis closely matches separate analysis from the Met Office Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.

Dr. Hansen reports that the record warmth was especially exceptional given that 2010 was the start of a strong La Niña pattern, which brings cool sea surface temperatures to the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean and should have offered a cooler global temperature.  He states, "Global temperature is rising as fast in the past decade as in the prior two decades, despite year-to-year fluctuations associated with the El Niño-La Niña cycle of tropical ocean temperature."

While this data might worry some, it could actually be happy news for mankind.  The slow, gradual warming shown in the report would likely over time open new shipping routes and improve agricultural viability in many regions.  While some areas might be gradually rendered uninhabitable (e.g. small low-lying islands), humans would naturally migrate to new homes, and the climate change would likely make some previously minimally habitable regions more hospitable.

Loss of species from climate change has certainly been suggested as a possible concern as well, but biodiversity in the Earth's warming periods has increased, not decreased historically.  Current temperatures are still far below these epochs of lush biodiversity that lie in the Earth's distant past.  The destruction of the rainforest and pollution of the sea have been put on the back burner during the climate debate, but represent far more serious immediate threats to our planet's biodiversity.

Other pressing questions include how fast warming will proceed and what other factors may be at play, besides greenhouse gases.  A recent study suggests that atmospheric dust levels may have significantly different effects on global temperature than previously thought.  Historical levels of atmospheric dust are poorly understood.  Further, it is unknown how much the Earth will dampen temperature increases.  Past history suggests that the Earth's biosphere resists the kind of run-away warming some experts' models have predicted, at least to a point.

Despite these distinctions, the NASA report is certainly intriguing and will likely be keenly observed and analyzed by those in the fields of agriculture and urban planning.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By zozzlhandler on 1/14/2011 2:03:56 PM , Rating: 5
I left out the question of "How do we take the temperature of a planet?". What about oceanic measurements? How many? At what depths? How often? In what seasons? It is *not* a trivial problem. Also, do the great all-predictive climate models take into account warming due to heat transfer from the interior of the earth? As one who has had occasion to work with computer models, I trust their predictions on complicated matters like climate about as far as I can throw a brick chimney by its smoke.
We cannot even predict the economy, so how do we get to claim we can predict the climate?

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By tharik on 1/14/2011 3:41:36 PM , Rating: 3
I agree. Where are the ocean measurements?

It takes a while for water to heat and cool, with the amount of water the earth has it may take as many as 30 years to heat and 30 years to cool. That is probably as close to the cyclical temperature that we have been experiencing.

Remember when the earth is warmer the atmosphere can absorb more water vapor and carbon, hence that is why carbon levels increase. Also, cloud cover increases which blocks/reflects a lot of the suns energy back to space.

For the next 30 years we will be cooling and after that the earth will start warming again for 30 years. Charging people taxes for carbon usage is the biggest scam in the history of the world.

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By vol7ron on 1/15/2011 2:34:32 PM , Rating: 3
I don't want to dismiss any claim, which may have merit, but I would like more information.

I don't know how they determine it's the warmest year, what concerns me is the extreme colds and extreme hots and how long those heat and cold waves last. If all that's taken is an average, that means nothing to me. That means if the temperature rotated between 1000F and -860F, it would only average to 70F, which sounds perfect, but not livable.

Averages mean nothing, it's when the fronts come, how severe they are, and how long the severities last.

The Earth has always gone through global warming and ice ages long before "man" had influence on the environment. Whether we contribute to the shift in climate is purely subjective and speculative. The day the weatherman can accurately forecast the weather is when I'll start believing in the scientists that say we're having influence on it.

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By SPOOFE on 1/16/2011 11:10:54 PM , Rating: 2
what concerns me is the extreme colds and extreme hots and how long those heat and cold waves last.

That concerns everyone. What concerns me, in addition, is whether or not those effects are natural; if they are, nothing we do will significantly affect the trend, but trying to may leave us incapable of properly adapting. Are we sure we want to make that commitment? Devote ourselves to one course that is mutually exclusive to properly adjusting to another possible course? I don't like burning bridges like that, and the political impatience with this issue doesn't leave me with a lot of trust for proposed "remedies".

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By Belard on 1/15/2011 8:09:36 PM , Rating: 3
Uh... they've been reporting warmer oceans for quite a while.

The earth is not going through 30-year cycles.

USA is the *only* country that even questions the data.

Uh... taxes, money and what not matters if we are having enviromental problems on a global scale.... floods, fires, crop failures - those cost money too. But hey, you saved 2 cents per gallon of gas.

Look up the "Ocean conveyor belt" with Google.

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By zozzlhandler on 1/16/2011 1:01:55 PM , Rating: 1
How can we be sure the ocean is really warmer? Have we measured enough of it, at enough depths? I doubt it. But assume for a moment it is warmer, is this (for certain) a bad thing? Is it caused by human activity? Are we really all doomed as some want to insist? I think that that answer to all of these is not yes, possibly not to any of them.

We need competent investigation of climate, not chicken-little panics and knee-jerk reactions.

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By SPOOFE on 1/16/2011 11:07:55 PM , Rating: 1
USA is the *only* country that even questions the data.

That's why China is rushing to Go Green, right? Right?

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By YashBudini on 1/15/2011 7:10:48 PM , Rating: 3
"How do we take the temperature of a planet?".

One rectal thermometer inserted into Washington DC.

RE: 1 degree C in 30 years
By TheBaker on 1/17/2011 12:28:30 AM , Rating: 2
Also, do the great all-predictive climate models take into account warming due to heat transfer from the interior of the earth?

Better question: Do they take into account the variability of the sun, also known as the source of 9.9999999% of all heat energy on the planet?

I seem to remember that they in fact do not, but that may be my faulty memory and I will gladly be corrected. In fact, I hope that I am corrected (with citation), otherwise these climate models mean exactly nothing.

"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki