This is a LIE. The United Nations apparently does not read their own IPCC reports. Globally, floods have not become more frequent or more intense, although there are regional variations within the bounds of internal variability. There are two primary types of floods relevant to this discussion: fluvial (river) and flash (pluvial). Long-term trends in river floods are usually evaluated by looking at river and streamflow from river / stream gauges. This can be evaluated by looking at the flux of water passing by a fixed point, and we measure this in units of cubic feet per second (ft³ / sec). With respect to river flooding trends, IPCC AR6 WG1 states in Chapter 11 that, 🗨️ “Peak flow trends are characterized by high regional variability and lack overall statistical significance of a decrease or an increase over the globe as a whole. Of more than 3,500 streamflow stations in the USA, central and Northern Europe, Africa, Brazil, and Australia, 7.1% stations showed a significant increase, and 11.9% stations showed a significant decrease in annual maximum peak flow during 1961–2005.” 🔗ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downl… (p. 1568) With respect to attributing flooding trends to human influence, the IPCC states, 🗨️ “In summary there is low confidence in the human influence on the changes in high river flows on the global scale. In general, there is low confidence in attributing changes in the probability or magnitude of flood events to human influence...” 🔗ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downl… (p. 1569) More recent streamflow data from USGS gauges (and compiled by the U.S. EPA) affirm the IPCC’s synthesis in that river floods in the U.S. have neither increased nor decreased over the last 60+ years. The map I made below on the left shows the change in the magnitude of river flooding in the Lower 48 since 1960. The triangle-shaped markers show the annual linear trend in peak river flows (ft³ / sec) from 1960 to 2025 for all 425 USGS river / stream gauges having at at least 95% completeness over the period examined. Only ~5.2% of gauges show a statistically significant increase in river floods and ~5.9% show a significant decrease. The rest are not statistically significant in either direction, so overall the trend isn’t statistically different from zero. With respect to flash flooding IPCC AR6 says, 🗨️ “[H]eavier rainfall does not always lead to greater flooding. This is because flooding also depends upon the type of river basin, the surface landscape, the extent and duration of the rainfall, and how wet the ground is before the rainfall event... A mix of both increases and decreases in [flash] flooding have been observed in some regions...” 🔗ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downl… (p. 8) Ahmadalipour & Moradkhani (2019) found no increase in flash flooding incidents in the U.S. between 1996 and 2017. I suspect that these trends have continued, but an update to this paper would be nice. 🔗sciencedirect.com/science/ar…

At the Nobel Peace Prize lecture Al Gore gave on December 10, 2007, he warned us that the Arctic could be “ice free” by the end of summer 2014. That didn’t happen. Oops. And this year’s September Arctic sea ice extent (SIE) five-day minimum of 4.60 million km² on September 12th was ~440,000 km² higher than the September 2007 minimum. Although the Arctic has lost ice since the 1970s, there has been little change since Al Gore made his speech almost 19 years ago. The significance of this is that the climate models in CMIP5 predicted that a 20-year-long pause in Arctic sea ice decline had just a 5% chance of occurring under the current emissions pathway and virtually 0% under SSP5-8.5 / RCP8.5. I suspect sea ice will eventually continue its decline in the future, but this just goes to show that natural variability is important and perhaps underestimated.

Get this. 🤣 Four years ago, The Guardian claimed that Spain and Portugal are becoming too dry thanks to anthropogenic climate change. However, after the devastating floods in fall 2024, The Guardian said that Spain is becoming too wet because of climate change. The observational data, however, tell a different story. A recent study published in Nature in March 2025 analyzed long-term rainfall data in the Mediterranean and found that no statistically significant long-term trends exist in the whole. 🗨️ “𝐻𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑤𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑤 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑀𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 1871 𝑡𝑜 2020, 𝑎𝑙𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑡 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑖-𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦… 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑑𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠, 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑡𝑜 𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑝ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑐𝑠, 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑏𝑒 𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑘𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦.” 🔗 nature.com/articles/s41586-0… Interestingly, in Spain, there has been little trend in rainfall since 1871. However, if the analysis starts in 1951, there is a significant decrease (p <0.05), while starting in 1981 yields a statistically significant increase (p <0.05). This just goes to show that people (like the writers at The Guardian) can manipulate data to get a desired trend to suit a specific narrative.

I have lots of new followers today. Welcome all! Last year, I went viral thanks to this [positive] piece written about me by in the New York Post. I am a meteorologist and I am politically incorrect. Here’s a little about me to whet your appetite. 🔗 nypost.com/2025/05/31/us-new…

I think about this all the time. One of the single dumbest decisions in history.

Hi there, @AaronParnas. Meteorologist here. 👋 ⛈️ Two things: 1️⃣ There is no such thing as a “super El Niño.” That is not a meteorological term in the scientific lexicon. What’s currently developing is a “very strong El Niño.” But you are correct that the lack of hurricanes in the Atlantic has a lot to do with it (high wind shear). 2️⃣ Whether you like President Trump or not, his “anti-climate” policies have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the El Niño. This isn’t the first “very strong El Niño” event that has occurred: we know they occurred in 1790–91, 1827–28, 1844–45, 1877–78, 1890–91, 1925–26, 1982–83, 1997–98, and 2015–16. The one currently developing may be the strongest in the instrumental record (since 1950), but it is uncertain whether or not it will eclipse the 1877–78 “benchmark.” 🔗 rainbow.ldeo.columbia.edu/~a…

It looks like a lock. 🔒 We are witnessing history in the making. There have been no hurricanes in the North Atlantic so far this year. 🌀 September 10th (Thursday) marks the climatological peak of the Atlantic hurricane season. And if we make it through Friday without one forming, which appears to be a lock now, it will be the first time in the satellite era (since 1966) that we have gotten this far into the calendar year without one hurricane formations in the Atlantic basin. In fact, the last time that this happened was in 1941, but the lack of satellite observations mean that it is very likely we missed a hurricane or two out over open water that didn't make landfall and/or come into contact with an unfortunate ship. If by some miracle we make it through September 21st without one, it will be the first time since 1914 (the only year other than 1907 where no hurricanes formed that season that we know of). But climatology is not in our favor, even with El Niño increasing the deep-layer vertical wind shear (change in wind speed or direction with height) in the 250–850 mb layer. For non-weather geeks / non-meteorologists, shear suppresses tropical cyclone intensification because it tilts the storm's vortex, knocking the low-level center out of alignment with its mid- and upper-level convection. Shear imports low-entropy (cooler/drier) air into the storm's warm core, which dries the eyewall out, and causes the heat engine that keeps a cyclone organized to break down.

I rewatched Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” this year. In 2006, when the “documentary” came out, he stated that atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentrations would reach 500 parts per million (ppm) within 50 years; that is, by 2056. Current levels are ~430 ppm. They are nowhere near 500 ppm yet and are not rising faster than expected. Why are you lying about something that is easily verifiable with a Google Search?

The Arctic Ocean will be ice-free by. . . 🎯 1980 🎯 1989 🎯 2000 🎯 2008 🎯 2010 🎯 2012 🎯 2013 🎯 2014 🎯 2015 🎯 2016 🎯 2017 🎯 2018 🎯 2019 🎯 2020 And now? 🎯 Could be as early as next year!

Last year, there were no hurricane landfalls in the U.S. for the first time since 2015. There is a decent chance that we could go through the rest of 2026 without any (though one or two can't be ruled out as we are now close to peak season), which would mark the first time we have seen back-to-back years with no U.S. hurricane landfalls since 2009–10. This has only occurred eight times since 1851.

Long story short, this is BS. Landslides / avalanches in Nepal have happened for tens of millions of years. In fact, floods associated with landslides are how the V-shaped valleys in the region were carved out millions of years ago at pre-industrial atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentrations. The Himalaya is an exceptionally steep and tectonically active mountain range where earthquakes trigger landslides, avalanches, and glacier collapses fairly regularly. The Google Earth satellite image I pulled up shows this well. Although an earthquake likely did not trigger the devastating landslide the other day, moderate earthquakes occur often due to plate tectonic movement lifting the Himalaya upward driving India into the Asian continent, and it is likely earthquakes in recent years and months helped set the stage for this. Frequent seismic shaking in alpine areas can fracture glaciers by creating crevasses, unstable blocks of ice called “seracs,” and hanging ice. 🔗 nhess.copernicus.org/article… The north face of the Himalaya in the Langtang Valley is characterized by steep slopes that are conducive for “hanging glaciers” (a type of glacier that starts high on a steep mountain wall and stops abruptly, usually at a cliff edge). These hanging glaciers are far more susceptible to destabilization and often produce avalanches when ice is knocked loose. Jim Steele (@JimSteeleSkepti) wrote a nice post about the geology behind this; I recommend giving it a read. Although warming and surface melt can affect glacier stability, basal conditions are largely controlled by geothermal heat flux, friction, pressure, and bedrock geography. And while there aren’t any paleoclimate temperature reconstructions in the exact area the recent disaster unfolded, there is evidence that both the Himalaya and Tibetan Plateau were warmer throughout much of the early-to-mid Holocene than they are today (e.g., Chen et al, 2020; Feng et al., 2022), which suggests that glaciers in the region may have also been smaller. 🔗 link.springer.com/article/10… 🔗 agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.… Climate change is real, yes. It always has changed and always will, and I don’t deny that at least some modern warming is due to carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. But glaciers are not a permanent fixture of our environment and we need to quit pretending that they are. Glaciers will always be growing or receding; they are not supposed to stay static over time. Pretending so is a fool’s errand.

Hoo boy. I don’t trust the federal government as far as I could bean bag toss Chris Christie in a round of corn hole, but this post is utter conspiratorial nonsense. Lightning is caused by charge separation in thunderstorms. It requires enormous energy from atmospheric convection; it is not caused by radio or microwave transmitters. Florida receives more lightning than just about anywhere else in the U.S., with most of the state averaging 80–120 strikes / km² per year. NEXRAD is just the U.S. network of Doppler radars used by meteorologists to detect precipitation and tornadoes. These WSR-88D radars send out very short microwave pulses with a peak power of ~750 kilowatts (kW), but they only transmit for a few seconds each hour, resulting in an average power of ~1.5 kW. The energy diffuses quickly and becomes extremely weak with distance. Even standing right outside of a Doppler radar dome delivers only a fraction of the intensity of putting your face against a running kitchen microwave oven (typically 700–1,200 watts focused in a small box). At the distances of actual storms, the signal is millions of times weaker and cannot heat the air, create lightning, or “microwave” people. HAARP is a research facility in Alaska that studies the ionosphere, a high layer of the atmosphere starting ~60 miles up. It beams high-frequency radio waves upward with a maximum power of 3.6 megawatts (MW) to temporarily heat small regions of plasma for scientific observation. Those radio waves are not absorbed in the lower atmosphere where weather and thunderstorms form, and the total energy is tiny compared with natural solar activity. Everything is a government conspiracy if ya don’t know how things work.