“A number of this year’s studies indicate that human-caused climate change greatly increased the likelihood and intensity for extreme heat waves in 2014 over various regions. For other types of extreme events, such as droughts, heavy rains, and winter storms, a climate change influence was found in some instances and not in others. This year’s report also included many different types of extreme events. The tropical cyclones that impacted Hawaii were made more likely due to human-caused climate change. Climate change also decreased the Antarctic sea ice extent in 2014 and increased the strength and likelihood of high sea surface temperatures in both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. For western U.S. wildfires, no link to the individual events in 2014 could be detected, but the overall probability of western U.S. wildfires has increased due to human impacts on the climate.”
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-ExplainingExtremeEvents2014.1 Abstract

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/08/21/extreme-weather-events-of-2015-is-climate-change-to- blame/#sthash.JiCZD9R6.dpuf

“Using fraction of attributable risk to compare the likelihood of extreme Australian summer temperatures between the experiments, it was very likely (>90% confidence) there was at least a 2.5 times increase in the odds of extreme heat due to human influences using simulations to 2005, and a fivefold increase in this risk using simulations for 2006–2020. The human contribution to the increased odds of Australian summer extremes like 2013 was substantial, while natural climate variations alone, including El Nin?o Southern Oscillation, are unlikely to explain the record temperature.”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50673/full

Not only extreme weather:
“Climate change – driven mainly by the burning of coal, oil and gas – has caused extreme ocean temperatures, making the bleaching on the GBR this year at least 175 times more likely. At present rates of climate change, this level of bleaching could occur every two years by the 2030s.”
https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/e3449c5187f7100528cc90c380993381.pdf

And I am *still* waiting for a straight answer.

Let’s test your integrity and good faith once more.

Human activity since 1880 has increased the amount of energy in the climate system. More energy in the climate system affects all weather events, though not equally or in the same way. But there is an effect, all the same. How could there not be?

I’m asking the question how could there not be an anthropogenic component to all modern weather? once again because you have not answered it so far, despite being asked three times now.

So, here we are again.

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/06/04/linking-weather-extremes-to-global-warming/

The impacts of climate extremes and the potential for disasters result from the climate extremes themselves and from the exposure and vulnerability of human and natural systems. Observed changes in climate extremes reflect the influence of anthropogenic climate change in addition to natural climate variability, with changes in exposure and vulnerability influenced by both climatic and non-climatic factors.

RIckA, you’re attempting to twist that into an agreement to do fractional denial.

Try again.

Which is what the SREX report said – so I am consistent with that.

I can’t be bothered to trawl through SREX 2012 (I presume you refer to 2012?) looking for what you claim it says. Please provide quote, link and page number.

I thought we had agreed we cannot do fractional attribution to a particular extreme event based on the current state of the science.

I thought we therefore agreed that meant we couldn’t say AGW had no role – but also that we couldn’t say AGW definitely had a role, in any particular extreme weather event.

No. That’s wrong and I’ve explained why several times now.

Because that is my position.

And it is wrong.

But by the same token, I also firmly believe there is no proof that AGW definitely had any influence over any particular weather event.

Which is what the SREX report said – so I am consistent with that.

Why aren’t you reading the links I provide? Links to studies that supersede the (obsolete and excessively cautious) SREX?

Here are some more for you:

Extreme hot weather events:

Coumou et al. (2013) Global increase in record-breaking monthly temperatures:

The last decade has produced record-breaking heat waves in many parts of the world. At the same time, it was globally the warmest since sufficient measurements started in the 19th century. Here we show that, worldwide, the number of local record-breaking monthly temperature extremes is now on average five times larger than expected in a climate with no long-term warming. This implies that on average there is an 80 % chance that a new monthly heat record is due to climatic change. Large regional differences exist in the number of observed records. Summertime records, which are associated with prolonged heat waves, increased by more than a factor of ten in some continental regions including parts of Europe, Africa, southern Asia and Amazonia. Overall, these high record numbers are quantitatively consistent with those expected for the observed climatic warming trend with added stationary white noise. In addition, we find that the observed records cluster both in space and in time. Strong El Niño years see additional records superimposed on the expected long-term rise. Under a medium global warming scenario, by the 2040s we predict the number of monthly heat records globally to be more than 12 times as high as in a climate with no long-term warming.

Seneviratne et al. (2014) No pause in the increase of hot temperature extremes:

Observational data show a continued increase of hot extremes over land during the so-called global warming hiatus. This tendency is greater for the most extreme events and thus more relevant for impacts than changes in global mean temperature.

I thought we had agreed we cannot do fractional attribution to a particular extreme event based on the current state of the science.

I thought we therefore agreed that meant we couldn’t say AGW had no role – but also that we couldn’t say AGW definitely had a role, in any particular extreme weather event.

Sorry for misunderstanding you.

Because that is my position.

I am happy to agree not to say that there is no proof that AGW didn’t have any influence over any particular weather event.

But by the same token, I also firmly believe there is no proof that AGW definitely had any influence over any particular weather event.

Which is what the SREX report said – so I am consistent with that.

http://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-linking-extreme-rainfall-flooding-and-climate-change-in-the-recent-uk-deluges

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/08/14/more-research-linking-global-warming-to-bad-weather-events/