Skip to content

The Heavily Urbanised Temperature Record In Chile

January 22, 2015
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

image

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/20/massive-tampering-with-temperatures-in-south-america/

 

Frederick Colbourne raised the question, in yesterday’s post, as to just how many temperature stations there actually were in the Chilean Andes, which NOAA show as being much warmer than average last year.

 

A quick analysis seems to show not many.

Altogether, there are twelve stations in Chile currently operational on GHCN. Of these, only two are rural, both far south.

 

 

Station Population
x1000
Latitude
South
Urban    
Arica 88 18
Antofagasta 125 23
La Serena 100 29
Pudahuel 3615 33
Santiago 3615 33
Concepcion 206 36
Temuco 197 38
Valdivia 116 39
Osorno 69 40
Puerto Montt 119 41
     
Rural    
Balmaceda <10 45
Punta Arenas <10 53

 

 

Neither of the rural sites show much in the of warming, although there was a noticeably cold period in the 1970’s.

 

punta

balm

 

In contrast, some of the urban sites show clear warming trends.

 

puda

la

concep 

 

Although there is no reason why temperature trends in northern Chile should follow those of the southern tip, it is nevertheless hardly any surprise when you see where some of the stations are sited. 

 

image

image

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/homr/#ncdcstnid=30055849&tab=LOCATIONS

 

 

NOAA make no separate allowance for UHI, as GISS supposedly do, so it appears that most of their temperature record for Chile is affected by UHI.

In terms of South America as a whole, GISS’ colour my world map is largely based on virtually no data for Brazil, heavily adjusted temperatures in Paraguay and a load of urban sites in Chile.

And they call it science!

 

nmaps

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/nmaps.cgi?sat=4&sst=3&type=anoms&mean_gen=1212&year1=2014&year2=2014&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=1200&pol=rob

 

 

 

All temperature data is from GISS

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/

8 Comments
  1. January 22, 2015 1:22 pm

    “many temperature stations there actually were in the Chilean Andes”
    Paul I used to live in the Atacama Desrt and have been most places in Chile
    1. “many temperature stations there actually were in the Chilean Andes” ..I don’t see which one is in the Andes ..most the ones I recognise in your list are places near to the sea ..ie at sea level.
    2. Chile of all the countries in the world has the most varying geography
    3. There must weather stations in almost every small town ..it is an advanced country

    • January 22, 2015 3:49 pm

      Yes, I was really just referring to Frederick’s question.

      It would be interesting to see if there is any correlation between the coastal stations and the mountain ones. There may also be infilling either to or from the Argentine side of the Andes, which would seem to defy reality.

  2. January 22, 2015 2:43 pm

    As noted elsewhere, the whole world has lived under a “Matrix of Deceit” since the end of WWII. Today I am convinced Joseph Stalin himself played a key role in designing “The Great Social Experiment of 1945-2015″ to guide government science by the UN’s agenda:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Social_Experiment.pdf

    Who else would enroll the entire human population in a worldwide social experiment without their consent?

  3. January 22, 2015 5:47 pm

    I don’t know why Arica is listed as Urban. The airport is 18.5 kilometers from town and is in the middle of nowhere.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chacalluta_International_Airport

    Meanwhile Punta Arenas airport is 21 km from Punta Arenas and it is classified as rural. It is actually more built up than Arica.

    http://www.travelmath.com/nearest-airport/Punta+Arenas,+Chile

  4. Anything is possible permalink
    January 22, 2015 8:45 pm

    I just stumbled on this GHCN v2 adjustment gem at Verkhoyansk. Focus on the year 2004, First note that the data from June 26th to July 3rd. is missing.

    http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/xgdcnRSM00024266.dat

    Now use the raw daily data to calculate the average for each month :

    The numbers I got were :

    January -44.3
    February -40.4
    March -19.9
    April -4.0
    May 7.3
    June 14.8
    July 20.1
    August 18.2
    September 7.7
    October -15.8
    November -28.8
    December -42.3

    Year -10.6

    Now compare these with the adjusted monthly numbers for 2004, also available from Climate Explorer :

    http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/x24266.dat

    January -32.8
    February -30.4
    March -7.8
    April -4.0
    May 7.4
    June -999.9
    July 15.2
    August 18.2
    September 7.7
    October -15.8
    November -28.9
    December -42.7

    Year

    “The algorithm is working as designed”

    As I say, this is only one station which I happened to stumble upon, but I can’t help wondering how widespread this kind of practice is when dealing with missing data.

  5. Andy DC permalink
    January 23, 2015 12:52 am

    How did the large area from central Russia to India go from well below normal to above? There is some actual data in that region. That appears on the face of it to be blatant cheating.

  6. January 23, 2015 4:37 pm

    Reblogged this on Globalcooler's Weblog and commented:
    Matt, are you seeing this?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: