Skip to content

Blaming Extreme Weather On Climate Change

March 15, 2016

By Paul Homewood  




WASHINGTON (AP) — Climate science has progressed so much that experts can accurately detect global warming’s fingerprints on certain extreme weather events, such as a heat wave, according to a high-level scientific advisory panel.

For years scientists have given almost a rote response to the question of whether an instance of weird weather was from global warming, insisting that they can’t attribute any single event to climate change. But "the science has advanced to the point that this is no longer true as an unqualified blanket statement," the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine reported.

Starting in 2004, dozens of complex peer-reviewed studies found the odds of some extreme events – but by no means all – were goosed by man-made climate change. This new field of finding global warming fingerprints is scientifically valid, the academies said in a 163-page report released Friday. The private non-profit has advised the government on complex, science-oriented issues since the days of President Abraham Lincoln.



There have been renewed attempts to convince us that global warming is causing more extreme weather. As I have argued before, it is all very well looking at a single extreme event and analysing the impact of warming.

After all, weather is an extremely complex phenomena, and it would be ridiculous to maintain that some events were not affected by global warming.

But what about all of the extreme weather events that HAVE NOT HAPPENED in the same period? Have they been made less likely by warming?


I was going to take a closer look at this, and may still do. However, Ron Clutz has some very pertinent thoughts, including some must read comments by Mike Hulme.


Read Ron’s post here.  

  1. Bitter& Twisted permalink
    March 15, 2016 12:13 pm

    I’m in full agreement with Mike Hulme’s comments on “Liability”:
    “A third argument for pursuing an answer to the ‘extreme weather blame’ question is inspired by the possibility of pursuing legal liability for damages caused”

    So what about the liability for the £$ trillions of damages already caused by pouring money into “Climate Science” and “renewables” and the resulting decimation of our industry and energy generation capacity?

    Who is going to get the blame here?

  2. perkscan permalink
    March 15, 2016 12:39 pm

    It seems to me that the main reason why scientists undertake work into climate change is, that’s where the money is. We all have to earn a living some way and there’s plenty of money available for it. You don’t have to believe it to decide that going with the money flow is more lucrative than looking for non-existent money to disprove the current popular religion.

  3. March 15, 2016 1:24 pm

    So what’s up with all of the “extreme weather” of the past? We need to ask them to come up with the “perfect day”, have it notarized and then call everything counter to it extreme? If they choose a sunny day, does that mean a rainy day is extreme? Will winter become “extreme” weather?

    • Dave N permalink
      March 16, 2016 7:15 am

      They avoid that type of question like the plague (and/or replace it by throwing the “D” word around), since given their premise, it’s impossible to answer.

  4. March 15, 2016 1:52 pm

    the name at the top of the $54 report is “David W. Titley (chair)
    Rear Admiral (retired)” remember how he looked an idiot in the Ted Cruz climate hearings

    Also some UK names :

    Gabriele Hegerl, Earth Sciences Professor, University of Edinburgh
    (Our Kenny must know her)

    Theodore G. Shepherd
    Grantham Professor of Climate Science, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading

  5. March 15, 2016 4:12 pm

    I was offered this article: which claims to link increased temperature with increases in lightning strikes. Trouble is, the maps (for US only) show Florida as high in CAPES and precipitation, but low in lightning strikes. Also the variable are not directly related to temperature. Also the rest of the world is only covered by extrapolation….

  6. markl permalink
    March 15, 2016 4:28 pm

    Another study where they found what they were looking for. Using all their identical criteria the same incidence of ‘extreme weather’ is found in natural variability…..if you look for it.

  7. M E permalink
    March 16, 2016 6:21 pm

    Do insurance companies offer cover for extreme weather under the heading “natural disaster”? Are they drumming up business by all this panic. Think of drought for farmers and flooding .. etc

    from NZ.

  8. March 17, 2016 6:05 am

    Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
    “what about all of the extreme weather events that HAVE NOT HAPPENED in the same period? Have they been made less likely by warming?”

    Exactly. Has supposed ‘global warming’ caused the record lull in North Atlantic cat 3-5 landfall hurricanes over the past 10+ years, since records began in late 1800’s? Check mate extreme weather alarmists.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: