South America – Overall Profile
There are 15 countries in the GHCN country list for South America. So the puzzle is how to assemble those individual profiles to make this “smooth warming out of a dip” profile.
The truncated country is:
302 – Bolivia, 88-90 has lots of holes, then ends. They, too, produce CLIMAT reports.
And the “by inspection of the tables mostly looking at peaks” FLAT countries are:
305 - Columbia 306 - Ecuador, lots of holes 308 - Paraguay 309 - Peru (Trying to make the team, though) 312 - Suriname 314 - Venezuela 315 - French Guiana, actually cooling trend 316 - Falkland Islands 317 - South Georgia Islands
Though as we’ve seen in other cases, these can have interesting “texture” inside that overall trend with things like step functions or a drop at the start before the GIStemp baseline that would still leave a ‘warming trend’ in the part of time that GIStemp chooses to use.
Uruguay – Free Basing on the Baseline?
One very fascinating case is Uruguay. At first I thought it was missing, but I’ve since found that I’d left it behind in moving reports from the Linux “Analysis” box over to where I was making graphs. Inspection of the graph is very interesting, and I think it has shown me a new “Trick”.
Notice that blue negative trend cold period? It is EXACTLY on the GIStemp baseline. We pop up to a bunch of stations then, stir them around a bit near the end, and then selectively drop a few of them on the exit. The net effect is to put a nice “dip” in the middle, and a rising trend at the end, with the temperature being roughly the same now as it was in the 1940’s and 1800. Neat Trick.
We still get the 1980 Step Function up and the 1990 “pivot” to a steeper slope. But this is the first time I’ve really paid attention to the baseline dip and I think this the first time I’ve seen the numbers pop exactly on the start and end dates. I’ll have to go back and inspect some of those other graphs and see if any of them do this to. I think I’ll call this the “Little Dipper” (as that’s what it looks like in the graph… ) So the question becomes: To what extent was The Baseline an ‘accidental cherry pick’ of a cool time, and to what extent might it have been “constructed” by thermometer selection…
(Checking the graphs below, it looks like Chile has a “Little Dipper” too, though not as ‘perfect’.)
The Hockey Stick League?
301 - Argentina 303 - Brazil 307 - Guyana (there is that English connection again...)
More than enough to blend in with the surrounding places and smooth the hockey stick… We’ll see as I get graphs made just how much “sticking” each one provides. Inspection of the tables gives an idea what will happen, but not exactly how the picture will look.
Brazil – Hockey in the Jungle Alright
We’ll start with Brazil. It’s large and dominates the middle of the continent. Any evidence for a bit of a Hockey Stick here?
( You can click on the graphs to get really big and much more readable ones)
Here we see a common feature, that drop at the start of time, then a long flat phase. I’ve not bothered to break them out for this “Segment by Thermometer Count” graph.
We also have another feature we’ve seen once or twice before. The “Two Step” where we have a “step function higher” in 1980 followed in 1990 by a “ramp higher”. We again get the “pinch” of volatility in the transition just about 1990 and we have a dramatic clipping of the negative going peaks after the pinch.
Something in that changed process of 1990 clips cold peaks out of the data. I’ve left those two segments concatenated as well. Brazil has more of a ‘drift’ of thermometers in and out of the record, so picking clean breaks by thermometer count group is a bit clumsy. This way you can just admire how a long mostly flat history “pivots” in 1980 and makes Hockey In The Jungle.
The other players in The South American League?
A long more or less flat period (though volatile) with a dozen or less thermometers. A “Step Function” up to another slightly tilted segment as thermometers jump to the 50’s and get moved around a little, then a perfect “bullseye pinch” with a small step up but a truly wonderful “warming trend” baked in via clipping the low temperature peaks more than the highs (That ‘white space’ between -1.5 and zero being larger than the white space between 0 and 1.5 after 1990). With the number of thermometers slowly drifting down. Could probably milk this for another decade with careful thermometer removal.
Guyana (That English connection again…)
More than enough to “lift” the neighbor countries via homogenizing, in-filling, The Reference Station Method and all the other forms of contagion built into the “Climatology Programs”. So lets look at the countries that surround these “Team Players”…
One Just MUST Love The French
As we saw in French Polynesia and in the Caribbean, the French do not believe in Global Warming. Ah, to be French, completely liberated from Carbon-Guilt. I simply must look up a Club Med package… While you are looking at this graph, compare it to that Guyana graph. Then think about the fact that these two countries are right next to each other (with Suriname in between) on the equatorial coast of South America. About the size of Montana for both combined (staring at my globe…) So how do two such close neighbors have such different “Global Warming”… Then go look at the Suriname graph…
We have hints of the Step in 1980 but it’s only good for about 1/4 C and we have the “pinch” of near zero volatility, but again, good only for 1/4 C (and that with a lot of slop in it…) Though I must point out that even a cooling place can contribute to “Global Warming”. Notice that deep dip? Look at the dates. About 1951 to 1980. EXACTLY the GIStemp baseline… So when compared to French Guiana in The Baseline, we will find that the rest of French Guiana history has “warming”… So here we have “How to turn 2 C of cooling into 1/2 C of warming” in one easy lesson.
And The Dutch
Such a wonderful trend. And sandwiched right between the French and Guyana.
Even Socialist Dictators Can Be Guilt Free
Despite clear indications of an attempt to get a rise out of Venezuela, about the best we’ve got is a relationship going nowhere:
We have the “bullseye” pinch of volatility in the monthly anomalies at the 1990+ change, but the best it could do was a slight drift higher. Not enough to really matter. I’d put it at about 1/4 C midpoint to midpoint. We’ll need to watch it, though, and see if enough accumulates over time to matter. After the Pinch we have a reduction in volatility to the downside out of proportion with that to the upside, so there is some “warming” built into the process, just not enough to get to an overall positive change… yet.
Does Columbia Feel The Heat?
Guess they like the climate the way it is…
Further down The Pacific Coast
Well, over all darned flat.
A nice new trend started from that “bullseye” 1990 change with good slope to it, but still no more than the 1940’s. Yeah, more than the 1951-1980 baseline of GIStemp. Has potential for the future maybe…. So a bit of a stick, but not very impressive… Maybe all the “holes” in the data can get some better “in-fill” from somewhere else in GIStemp.
I’d have considered putting Peru on The Hockey Team, but it’s definitely just in the C league farm team category. We have a new rising trend, now that we’ve had some thermometers dropped, but they were dropped after most other folks already had their dropping out of the way.
We’ve got a great rise out of the “Dip” in that 1951-1980 baseline that GIStemp uses, but then that long flat handle. (Guess that’s why some pruning was needed). Yet through it all, we’re right back where we were in 1943. Sheesh. All right Peru, skate two laps then give me a shootout run at the net. Maybe next year we can put you on the Big League Team…
So much work to get a trend going, then it got dropped?
So we have a step function higher as a bunch of thermometers were added, but they were added in the baseline. Doh! Then we get a Great Change Of Trend with that 1980 change, just a Rocket Ride. And it gets dropped on the floor. Doh Doh!
Maybe it’s just “in the bank” waiting to be resurrected when the “lift” from Peru “in-fill” isn’t enough? But what a bummer, such a great new trend wasted. ( Though I’d confidently predict it will be “put back in” Real Soon Now ;-)
With Argentina right next door serving as a good example, this is the best you can do?
So dead flat that I had to make the accumulated “change” Hot Pink (really light magenta) so it would show up. And with a trend line formula of: 0x -0.4
Now that is flat.
Then There Is Paraguay
Don’t really know what to do with that. Warmed, but long ago. Then cooled. But now it’s in a warming trend, but not more than it cooled before. Guess that’s just some oscillation thing going on. Interesting to look at, though, and not what CO2 Theory would predict.
And Those Southern Islands
Oh Dear! Seems to have been getting a mite cold down south… wonder if that’s why it suddenly ended in the 1980’s?. Wunderground has them at 39 F as I type… Still cold.
But don’t worry, looks like there is a “fix” in progress:
Notice that the “cumulative change” is divided into two segments. Notice further that there is a big chunk of ‘missing time’ in between them. So after 30 years of absence, just as the PDO and a couple of other ocean currents have swapped phase, we have the miraculous return to life of that thermometer… and with a fine warming trend too. (Notice that the “cold spikes” make it only to about 2.5 C to 3 C while the “warm spikes” are almost to 5 C, very odd.)
A splicing we will go, a splicing we will go
High Ho the dairy-O, a splicing we will go…