>WaPo article has some measures of certainty:
>
>
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/20/its-official-2015-smashed-2014s-global-temperature-record-it-wasnt-even-close/>
>"The latest record means that 2014 — the previous record year — only officially held that title for one year. 2014 came by its record by a relatively narrow margin — for instance, NASA gave 2014 a 38 percent chance of having been the warmest year on record, still reserving a nontrivial chance that the real warmest year had been 2010 or 2005. (NOAA gave a 48 percent chance that 2014 had, at the time, been the warmest year.)
>
>"This year, in contrast, there is little need for citing percentages or a statistical photo finish. Buoyed by a powerful El Niño event, 2015 shattered the 2014 record. NASA’s Schmidt suggests there is only a 5 percent possibility that any other year on record was actually warmer."
>
Friendly piece of advice....starting off with "here are some measures of certainty" and ending with "NASA suggests" doesn't exactly merit a strong scientific approach :)
Yes, El Nino is having an impact. September was a scorcher for much of the U.S. But remember that some science sources have adjusted their 2015 numbers DOWNWARD because of differences regarding land and sea-based weather stations that were analyzed after the initial reports of 2015.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3388407/2015-NOT-hottest-year-record-Satellite-data-shows-temperatures-lower-thought.htmlI'll start believing that there's something "there" when the press ceases with these euphemistically dishonest knee-jerk reactions
