What Are These?
These are graphs of the monthly change of temperatures, year over year, and the sum of those changes over the years. A very pure form of “anomaly” process. Each month is compared to the next valid data for that month and the difference is noted (so if January is 1 C warmer than the last time January had a valid data item, you would get the JAN line at 1C on the graph). In theory, over time, this would accumulate to the change of temperature to date. In practice, we see evidence in these graphs that there have been changes to the thermometers and the data record that bias the outcomes.
But we saw North America already?
I’d started doing a “paced” analysis and that prior North America posting was a few specific interesting observations. There were then some requests for specific graphs and a desire for a bit of a ‘jump ahead”, so I responded. I did the Pacific Basin, South America, and Asia sets of graphs as mostly “just the graphs”. Now, looking back at that North America posting, it’s a nice intro / analysis, but not a good vehicle for “A Gaggle of Graphs”…
So here I’ll be putting the graphs, in a more consistent “Hair” format. The “hair” is all that monthly detail. You could suppress it by only showing the “annual average” of them that I’ve labeled “dT/yr”, but it does not give quite as much information (even if it does look cleaner and is less confusing at first sight.)
So this will be a set of graphs just showing all of North America as “monthly change of temperature” lines for each month (the “hair”), the running total of their annual averages (that dT line) and a count of the thermometer records in each year.
The Big Parts – USA, Canada, Mexico, Greenland
While this accounts for the bulk of the land area, sometimes it’s the “little bits” that have the more interesting story to tell, so don’t expect these guys to “tell the tale”…
Well, the USA has a LOT of data. This makes the “All Data” graph very hard to read. So I’ve made one, but you will need to click on it to see anything much. Long, flat, USA is a Carbon-Guilt Free zone, and has been for over 200 years. Particularly interesting to me is the hot 1930’s, just as our written history ( and my Dad’s descriptions to me…) recorded.
Even cutting it down to 1825 start date is a bit large. Notice that the trend of the “blade” on our little hockey stick tries to get a lift in trend, but our recent cool spate and sleepy sun have quashed it. Unless you measure from a “cherry picked baseline”, there is no warming. Everything is substantially like it has been in the past. We did have some cold times, but we’ve had warm times too. 100 year weather changes. 30 year “climate” is an oxymoron.
And I’d really like to know how CO2 made it so hot in the early 1829 and the 1930’s…
We looked at Mexico before as a straight graph of all data without any segmentation by date or by thermometer count:
And we easily see that the tops are not getting any hotter (though some of the bottoms have stopped going as far down as they used to go.
So what does it look like as segments by thermometer count with trends lines? It looks like several cooling segments spliced together and with a bit of a hockey stick blade glued onto the end, but still not enough to make a warming trend unless you measure against the cold “Dip” of the 1960’s and 1970’s that make the GIStemp “baseline” of 1951-1980 a “cherry pick”.
Do the Dane’s play hockey in Greenland? “You Betcha!” A really nice blade on the end of the stable shaft of the 1930 to 1990 dropping trend. This “pivot” of trend happening right at the same time the thermometers all get swapped around… (notice how many records are dropped right at the pivot point.)
Caribbean Islands and Bermuda
The Bermuda Islands are not really part of the Caribbean Islands, but I’m going to put the graph here as it is more like them than like the mainland.
Nice mostly flat dropping trend from a single thermometer. Nice.
Don’t know quite what to make of this. There is a very short 29 year data record that ends in August of ’87 then jumps a gap to 2008 and 2009.
Don’ know what to make of this. Data effectively ends about 1965 ( when it iflls up with a load of dropouts) then we get one January datum in 1993 that’s 3/10 C cooler than January of 1967 that was itself 6/10 C cooler than the prior year to it… I’s almost like someone checks in every few decades and finds no warming so drops it… And of course, now with the quake, it’s going to be hard to get valid data for a few years.
Just for fun I’ve done a log fig trend line. Looks like a better fit than a linear line. Notice that the tops tend to bounce off the zero line, but the lower end tends to “clip” a bit over time. The end result of this “volatility compression” is more of an approach to no change at zero than an ongoing linear increase. Perhaps I ought to have tried this fit on some other graphs as well?
Virgin Islands (U.S. and U.K.)
The U.K. Virgin Islands have NIL data.
St. Kitts and Nevis
Eight years of data. Hardly worth it.
Antigua and Barbuda
NIL data in the file
Don’t know exactly what to make of this other than that we had a lousy thermometer early on; and not much has changed since the 1950’s:
NIL Data in the file
NIL data in the file
St.Vincent and the Grenadines
NIL data in file
St. Pierre and Miquelon Island
Don’t know what to make of this one either. It pops up, then cuts off in 1963. Can’t have hot places in the GIStemp baseline?
Wonder what that thermometer change was in the early 1960’s? Maybe a move to a new Jet Airport? It’s about the right ‘era’ for airport growth… OK, show of hands: Who wants to go to Martinique and research the history?….
OK, you, yes, you in the back, sitting down. You go. Report back when you run out of vacation time.
Oh, I’m beginning to really like the Dutch ;-) They seem to really like consistent instrumentation. So, if you have a vacation choice between the Netherlands Antilles vs. Trinidad and Tobago, well, just remember that Netherlands Antilles are a Carbon-Guild Free Zone, while Trinidad and Tobago are not…
Trinidad and Tobago
Wow! That is one heck of a Rocket Ride of hot! Given how surrounding countries are not warming, I’d expect there is a significant problem with the thermometers on Trinidad and Tobago! Yet this rocket ride, being fairly long lived and complete, will be smeared and spread to all the “nearby” places up to 1000 km away to fill in missing data (via “homogenizing”) and then it, and those other places, will be spread up to an added 1200 km as “Grid / Box” anomalies in GIStemp. Go figure…
At any rate, Trinidad and Tobago get a “Double Dip” Carbon-Guilt rating. Anyone contemplating a vacation there must keep in mind that no A/C is to be used and no fuel powered transport. You are required to walk to the pool or beach, park it in a suitable place in the sun or shade, and have your beverages (and preferably meals) brought to you by the staff. Tips to be 20% as penance… Only locally grown food to be consumed. Drinks preferably from local rum. Suffer your Carbon Guilt until you can’t stand it any longer. Then visit the Netherlands Antilles …
Me? I’d figure it was a broken temperature series and go look at the instrument history.
Turks and Caicos Islands
Well, that’s it for North America. We have a lot of graphs going in different directions. We can see some Volcanic action in the early ’70s. We’ve got LOADS of missing data in Central America and far more missing in The Caribbean Islands. And at the end of it all, we see a great deal of impact from “playing with the instruments” and not very much else. In many cases, the “baseline” period used by GIStemp drops on added thermometers, but then we “have global warming” as they are taken away until we are left where we were before the baseline. Not exactly what you would expect from a regularly accumulating gas, like CO2, with maximum impact early on and exponential decrease of to date.
Basically, the data profiles here are great for seeing folks fooling around with the thermometers and the data record; and pretty lousy at showing any impact from CO2 at all.