>area of the ozone hole ranked the seventh-smallest since recovery began in 1992<p>Yet later in the article:<p>>In previous years, NOAA and NASA have reported the ozone hole ranking using a time period dating back to 1979 (...) . Using that longer record (...) this year's hole ranked 20th-smallest in area across 45 years of observations.<p>20th-smallest or 25th-biggest. So looks like perfectly average size to me.<p>If we look at year earlier:<p>>the hole ranked as the 12th largest single-day ozone hole since 1979.<p>from:<p><a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/152023/modest-ozone-hole-in-2023" rel="nofollow">https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/152023/modest-ozone...</a><p>Why do I have a feeling these numbers are being manipulated?