Brazil’s Temperature Trends & UHI
By Paul Homewood
According to GISS, most of Brazil was a degree or more warmer last year than the 1951-80 average.
GHCN have 33 stations currently operating in the country, most of which are heavily urbanised or airport sites like Brasilia. Such sites clearly cannot be relied upon to give reliable temperature trends.
There are however 7 sites, which GISS classify as rural, based on satellite observed nightlights. In theory, GISS adjust temperatures at the urban sites for UHI, so as to align trends with the rural ones.
Sounds fine in theory? Well, let’s take a look at these rural sites.
Sao Gabriel
At first sight, this one seems to confirm the trend in Brasilia. However, we learn from the GHCN station list that Sao Gabriel is also an airport location, with the sensor next to an asphalt runway. (This is a particular problem with locations like this – as the airports don’t work at night, there is no brightness for the satellite to spot, and therefore are counted as rural. Indeed, much the same applies to many small towns in out of the way places, which may be quite populous, have roads etc, but not much lighting at night).
While it is not a busy airport, the location clearly has an warming effect. The station metadata does not state how long the airport has been there, or how long the asphalt has been down.
As such, the temperature record at Sao Gabriel is worthless.
To cap it all, GHCN has decided to adjust temperatures up by about half a degree since recordings resumed a few years ago!
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/v3/products/stnplots/3/30382106000.gif
Benjamin Constant
A very incomplete record until the last decade, during which temperatures have been declining. There is no assurance at all that the few temperature measurements taken in the 1970’s can safely be compared with current ones, in terms of quality, location etc.
Also, according to Wikipedia, Benjamin Constant has a population of 26000.
Coari
According to Wikipedia, Coari (Choary) is a Brazilian municipality in the Amazon region. It is also one of the largest cities of the Amazonas state. It is the seat of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Coari. The area has reserves of oil and natural gas, and has a population of 82000.
Barra do Corda
Again, despite its classification as rural, Barra do Corda has a population of 86000.
http://cardeckma-ferreira.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/barra-do-corda-ma.html
Quixeramobim
You’ve guessed it! According to Wikipedia, it has a population of 75000.
http://www.turismonaweb.com.br/aniversario-do-dia/Quixeramobim%28CE%29.htm
Cruzeiro do Sul
Population of 79000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruzeiro_do_Sul,_Acre
http://princesinhadojurua.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/blog-post.html
Carolina
This one only has a population of 23000. The temperature recording station is bang in the middle of a built up area.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/homr/#ncdcstnid=30059804&tab=LOCATIONS
SUMMARY
And that’s it! Not one station that could remotely be called a rural one. Moreover, in every case the amount of urban development that must have taken place in the last 50 years or so will have added significantly to any urban heat island effect.
To make matters worse, non rural sites are homogenised against these faux rural sites.
It is little wonder that GISS show Brazil as one of the fastest warming places on the planet.
The ugly truth is that we see this same sort of pattern in many, many parts of the world. Proper scientists would not touch any of this data with a bargepole.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
My first visit to this site and …………. I am beginning to think that maybe, just maybe, I am being misled as to the motives of climate scientists. Are they really motivated by the need for grants and does that lead to temptation to misrepresent data?
Have you seen this? http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021015-738779-climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism.htm
They are doing so at the behest of their Boss.
A certain Mr B Obama.
Having been told from a young age to always listen and assess information before making a judgement i had become very concerned at what seemed to be a very one sided argument being made particularly by the BBC who along with others were denying the public a fair and balanced account. Few it seemed were able to challenge the Alarmist Lobby and get their voice heard. This site is a breath of fresh air (!) and far from being followed by people that care little about the environment (as I’m sure it’s detractors would claim) is populated by well meaning and intelligent individuals……Welcome Peter.
Welcome to the party Peter.
Hey Peter! One of the most difficult things for any sceptic to realize that while most scientists are honest, it is not a universal. For those of us who love science and the scientific method, the experience is similar (I suspect) to that of devoutly religious people who find that their priest or minister has embezzled church funds.
As always, follow the data, examine the evidence, and watch for which scientists refuse to divulge their methods of “adjusting” the data.
Hi Paul,
I used the Lat./Long. on your image of Sao Gabriel Airport with Google Earth.
Then I used the time function (clock, in tasks) that shows an image from 12/1969.
The quality is not good but, still, the runway seems to be under construction.
For the image of 9/2002 the dark of the runway and the bare soil is in sharp contrast.
Note the service roads on either side of the runway. In 2002 they are “newly bare” while in the current image (12/6/2014 they are nearly hidden by trees, or have been abandoned.
The data page claims it is for Sao Gabriel D (?) and the coordinates there are for a spot 6+ miles west of the airport in a patch of woods. Rounding location values is never a good idea.
~~~~~
[19° F. in central Washington State at 7 A.M.]
This is the original version 1 (GISS NASA) for Quixeramobim.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=303825860000&dt=1&ds=1
Quite a bit of adjustment compared to your latest version above.
Good spot, Ian
What you have there is the unadjusted GHCN V2 data upto 2011, showing a flat or declining trend.
The new version I have shown is the current GHCN V3 adjusted trend, showing massive warming
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=303825860000&dt=1&ds=12
Paul
Here is the Berkeley (BEST) data for this site.
http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/stations/153007
Raw data shows cooling – adjusted data shows warming.
Another example of this kind of manipulation of the data, http://bit.ly/1STtqcG
In tectonically stable Brazil:
The Quaternary Geological History of the Santa Catarina Southeastern Region (Brazil) 1999
The first part discusses drilling in several locations and analyzing samples. They mention dating prior to that was guesses. “…. A drilling campaign done in the domain permitted the sampling of material for 14C datings, and the obtained data confirmed some previously assumed ages. The sequence of events, that originated the Holocene deposits, has been also reconstructed through drilling and 14C dating of the collected peat and shell samples…”
In the body of the text is this:
This study shows a sea level highstand ~ 4 meters above the present level about ~5000 years ago with sea level oscillating since then. Not only has the sea levels dropped since the Holocene Optimum the evidence shows that “warmer paleotemperatures were favourable for great proliferation of mollusks in the area”
Santa Catarina Brazil is at latitude 27.2500°S.
Global warming? WHAT global warming.
This is not an isolated case either. Two more studies showing falling sea level in tectonically stable areas. (There are at least ten.)
Mid to late Holocene sea-level reconstruction of Southeast Vietnam using beachrock and beach-ridge deposits
Translation the sea level was up to 1.5 meters higher than today in a tectonically stable area ~5000 years ago to 2000 years ago.
Late Quaternary highstand deposits of the southern Arabian Gulf: a record of sea-level and climate change
This study shows a sea level highstand ~1 to 2 meters above the present level about ~5500 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The first study, Santa Catarina, is a critical study because it is the one that yanks the WIKI sea level chart below, from a falling sea level to a slowly rising sea level. Santa Catarina is that dark red cross above the pack on the right. Remove it and sea level is actually falling for the last 2,000 years. (The area is tectonically stable and unglaciated so there is no need for the adjustments done to disappear the ~2 meter fall in sea level since the Holocene Optimum 5,000 years ago .)
I have yet to find ANY data set that has not been ‘adjusted’ to fit the CAGW meme.