Another Manntastic claim: Extreme weather events linked to climate change impact on the jet stream

From Penn State, and the “close but no cigar” department (see bold in text) comes this modelspalooza masquerading as science:

On the is an image of the global circulation pattern on a normal day. On the right is the image of the global circulation pattern when extreme weather occurs. The pattern on the right shows extreme patterns of wind speeds going north and south, while the normal pattern on the left shows moderate speed winds in both the north and south directions. CREDIT Michael Mann, Penn State

Unprecedented summer warmth and flooding, forest fires, drought and torrential rain — extreme weather events are occurring more and more often, but now an international team of climate scientists has found a connection between many extreme weather events and the impact climate change is having on the jet stream.

“We came as close as one can to demonstrating a direct link between climate change and a large family of extreme recent weather events,” said Michael Mann, distinguished professor of atmospheric science and director, Earth System Science Center, Penn State. “Short of actually identifying the events in the climate models.”

The unusual weather events that piqued the researchers’ interest are things such as the 2003 European heat wave, the 2010 Pakistan flood and Russian heatwave, the 2011 Texas and Oklahoma heat wave and drought and the 2015 California wildfires.

The researchers looked at a combination of roughly 50 climate models from around the world that are part of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5), which is part of the World Climate Research Programme. These models are run using specific scenarios and producing simulated data that can be evaluated across the different models. However, while the models are useful for examining large-scale climate patterns and how they are likely to evolve over time, they cannot be relied on for an accurate depiction of extreme weather events. That is where actual observations prove critical.

The researchers looked at the historical atmospheric observations to document the conditions under which extreme weather patterns form and persist. These conditions occur when the jet stream, a global atmospheric wave of air that encompasses the Earth, becomes stationary and the peaks and troughs remain locked in place.

“Most stationary jet stream disturbances, however, will dissipate over time,” said Mann. “Under certain circumstances the wave disturbance is effectively constrained by an atmospheric wave guide, something similar to the way a coaxial cable guides a television signal. Disturbances then cannot easily dissipate, and very large amplitude swings in the jet stream north and south can remain in place as it rounds the globe.”

This constrained configuration of the jet stream is like a rollercoaster with high peaks and valleys, but only forms when there are six, seven or eight pairs of peaks and valleys surrounding the globe. The jet stream can then behave as if there is a waveguide — uncrossable barriers in the north and south — and a wave with large peaks and valleys can occur.

“If the same weather persists for weeks on end in one region, then sunny days can turn into a serious heat wave and drought, and lasting rains can lead to flooding,” said Stefan Rahmstorf, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Germany.

The structure of the jet stream relates to its latitude and the temperature gradient from north to south.

Temperatures typically have the steepest gradients in mid-latitudes and a strong circumpolar jet stream arises. However, when these temperature gradients decrease in just the right way, a weakened “double peak” jet stream arises with the strongest jet stream winds located to the north and south of the mid-latitudes.

“The warming of the Arctic, the polar amplification of warming, plays a key role here,” said Mann. “The surface and lower atmosphere are warming more in the Arctic than anywhere else on the globe. That pattern projects onto the very temperature gradient profile that we identify as supporting atmospheric waveguide conditions.”

Theoretically, standing jet stream waves with large amplitude north/south undulations should cause unusual weather events.

“We don’t trust climate models yet to predict specific episodes of extreme weather because the models are too coarse,” said study co-author Dim Coumou of PIK. “However, the models do faithfully reproduce large scale patterns of temperature change,” added co-author Kai Kornhuber of PIK.

The researchers looked at real-world observations and confirmed that this temperature pattern does correspond with the double-peaked jet stream and waveguide patter associated with persistent extreme weather events in the late spring and summer such as droughts, floods and heat waves. They found the pattern has become more prominent in both observations and climate model simulations.

“Using the simulations, we demonstrate that rising greenhouse gases are responsible for the increase,” said Mann. The researchers noted in today’s (Mar. 27) issue of Scientific Reports that “Both the models and observations suggest this signal has only recently emerged from the background noise of natural variability.”

“We are now able to connect the dots when it comes to human-caused global warming and an array of extreme recent weather events,” said Mann.

While the models do not reliably track individual extreme weather events, they do reproduce the jet stream patterns and temperature scenarios that in the real world lead to torrential rain for days, weeks of broiling sun and absence of precipitation.

“Currently we have only looked at historical simulations,” said Mann. “What’s up next is to examine the model projections of the future and see what they imply about what might be in store as far as further increases in extreme weather are concerned.”

###


If Mann’s press release wasn’t heavy on alarmism enough, read the press release by fellow RealCimateer Stefan Rahmstort

Weather extremes: Humans likely influence giant airstreams

POTSDAM INSTITUTE FOR CLIMATE IMPACT RESEARCH (PIK)

The increase of devastating weather extremes in summer is likely linked to human-made climate change, mounting evidence shows. Giant airstreams are circling the Earth, waving up and down between the Arctic and the tropics. These planetary waves transport heat and moisture. When these planetary waves stall, droughts or floods can occur. Warming caused by greenhouse-gases from fossil fuels creates favorable conditions for such events, an international team of scientists now finds.

“The unprecedented 2016 California drought, the 2011 U.S. heatwave and 2010 Pakistan flood as well as the 2003 European hot spell all belong to a most worrying series of extremes,” says Michael Mann from the Pennsylvania State University in the U.S., lead-author of the study now to be published in Scientific Reports. “The increased incidence of these events exceeds what we would expect from the direct effects of global warming alone, so there must be an additional climate change effect. In data from computer simulations as well as observations, we identify changes that favor unusually persistent, extreme meanders of the jet stream that support such extreme weather events. Human activity has been suspected of contributing to this pattern before, but now we uncover a clear fingerprint of human activity.”

How sunny days can turn into a serious heat wave

“If the same weather persists for weeks on end in one region, then sunny days can turn into a serious heat wave and drought, or lasting rains can lead to flooding”, explains co-author Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany. “This occurs under specific conditions that favor what we call a quasi-resonant amplification that makes the north-south undulations of the jet stream grow very large. It also makes theses waves grind to a halt rather than moving from west to east. Identifying the human fingerprint on this process is advanced forensics.”

Air movements are largely driven by temperature differences between the Equator and the Poles. Since the Arctic is more rapidly warming than other regions, this temperature difference is decreasing. Also, land masses are warming more rapidly than the oceans, especially in summer. Both changes have an impact on those global air movements. This includes the giant airstreams that are called planetary waves because they circle Earth’s Northern hemisphere in huge turns between the tropics and the Arctic. The scientists detected a specific surface temperature distribution apparent during the episodes when the planetary waves eastward movement has been stalling, as seen in satellite data.

Using temperature measurements since 1870 to confirm findings in satellite data

“Good satellite data exists only for a relatively short time – too short to robustly conclude how the stalling events have been changing over time. In contrast, high-quality temperature measurements are available since the 1870s, so we use this to reconstruct the changes over time,” says co-author Kai Kornhuber, also from PIK. “We looked into dozens of different climate models – computer simulations called CMIP5 of this past period – as well as into observation data, and it turns out that the temperature distribution favoring planetary wave airstream stalling increased in almost 70 percent of the simulations since the start of the industrial age.”

Interestingly, most of the effect occured in the past four decades. “The more frequent persistent and meandering Jetstream states seems to be a relatively recent phenomenon, which makes it even more relevant,” says co-author Dim Coumou from the Department of Water and Climate Risk at VU University in Amsterdam (Netherlands). “We certainly need to further investigate this – there is some good evidence, but also many open questions. In any case, such non-linear responses of the Earth system to human-made warming should be avoided. We can limit the risks associated with increases in weather extremes if we limit greenhouse-gas emissions.”

###

Article: Michael E. Mann, Stefan Rahmstorf, Kai Kornhuber, Byron A. Steinman, Sonya K. Miller, Dim Coumou (2017): Influence of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Planetary Wave Resonance and Extreme Weather Events. Scientific Reports [DOI: 10.1038/srep45242]

Weblink to the article once it is published: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep45242



To all this modeling sans empirical evidence I say:

Nature had an editorial five years ago that remains germane today:

Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.

Having 50  models (as Mann’s PR says) isn’t necessarily better, but it does help convince people who believe that consensus is more important than actual evidence.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
250 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
fretslider
March 27, 2017 11:10 am

The ever faithful Guardian manages to hype it up to doom level 3.

The fingerprint of human-caused climate change has been found on heatwaves, droughts and floods across the world, according to scientists. (No cold?!)

“Human activity has been suspected of contributing to this pattern before, but now we uncover a clear fingerprint of human activity,” said Prof Michael Mann

And best of all

Other climate research, called attribution, is increasingly able to calculate how much more likely specific extreme weather events have been made by global warming.

Climate change: ‘human fingerprint’ found on global extreme weather

Attribution in action..

The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report concluded that, “Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.” The report defines “very likely” as a greater than 90% probability and represents the consensus of the scientific community.

TomRude
Reply to  fretslider
March 27, 2017 11:32 am

The Guardian is such a presstitute.
Following the Jets on http://squall.sfsu.edu/crws/jetstream.html
One can see over the course of one year that jets are convoluted yet more powerful in boreal winter than in boreal summer, invalidating the Guardian mickey Mouse graphics and much of poor Coumou’s straw man arguments.
Moreover claiming that there are no warm air advections to the poles in winter with a strong jet stream is beyond ignorance as anyone watching satellite animations can see.
Pure ideology at work and media to serve it.

mothcatcher
Reply to  TomRude
March 27, 2017 12:51 pm

Good comment, Tom Rude/
I’m almost tempted to read the full paper to see what their explanation of the seasonal disparity might be.
I said ALMOST. Don’t think I will actually bother.

SocietalNorm
Reply to  TomRude
March 27, 2017 9:51 pm

Thank you, TomRude for the jet stream link. I’d been looking for a good graphical representation of it.

Berényi Péter
March 27, 2017 11:14 am

The increase of devastating weather extremes in summer is likely linked to human-made climate change, mounting evidence shows.

I can’t see the increase of devastating weather extremes in summer is a proven fact. If it is not, it is extremely unlikely it could be linked to anything, mounting evidence notwithstanding.

Devastating increase, anyone?

https://waterwatch.usgs.gov/2014summary/images/fig_01.svg

Average runoff in the Nation’s rivers and streams during water-year 2014 (8.91 inches) was very close to the long-term annual mean for the United States (9.29 inches). Nationwide, 2014 streamflow ranked 52nd out of the 85 years in the period 1930-2014.

see: USGS — Streamflow of 2014 – Water Year Summary

March 27, 2017 11:19 am

While the models do not reliably track individual extreme weather events, they do reproduce the jet stream patterns and temperature scenarios that in the real world lead to torrential rain for days, weeks of broiling sun and absence of precipitation.

So the models cannot reliably reflect the real world but they can do something else…
Therefore that something else must be happening for the reasons modelled? In the real world?

Surely the correct assumption is that the “jet stream patterns and temperature scenarios” cannot be understood as to their cause. If it could then the models would reliably track individual extreme weather events.

troe
March 27, 2017 11:54 am

Mis- named Clean Power Plan expected to be taken for a ride tomorow. Please send donations instead of flowers to We Suck At Buying The Law.

March 27, 2017 11:58 am

Whatever happened to the Aleutians Low, Icelandic Low, Siberian High, Azores High and Hawaiian High semi-permanent pressure cells. Their strength and position determine basic circulation, and the ever-changing mid-to-high latitude ocean temperatures play a key role. Look for the AMO, PDO and other patterns for relationships. I was teaching these basics starting in the 1960’s. The jet patterns of zonal and meridional flow also were known. We used to teach that when a given pattern persisted for a period of time, whatever weather pattern occurred relative to any given location also persisted for a period of time. The axiom was 3-6 weeks in a stalled pattern. So, if a meridional pattern looped down into Texas during January we froze our Canadian prairie butts off under the influence of a continental arctic air mass dragged from the north (whatever happened to air masses?). When a zonal pattern occurred we had more moderate maritime Pacific air. There is very little new in this paper. All they have done is attribute long established patterns to AGW. Event data, however, does not validate their premise – so their paper and suppositions are unprecedentedly worthless.

Ron Williams
March 27, 2017 12:00 pm

“We are now able to connect the dots when it comes to human-caused global warming and an array of extreme recent weather events,” said Mann.

And the premise of the warming is human induced CO2, right? (As is implied throughout your entire paper) So how come you only report some weather events in the northern hemisphere, and not one word on the southern hemisphere? Presumably, CO2 is mixed throughout the atmospheres of both southern and northern hemispheres and these “weather” related events should also be present in both hemispheres and be able to be demonstrated as such. Your failure Doctor Mann et al… is stunning. You will at least be remembered in history as one of the scientific charlatans of the ‘Anthropocene’ period!

Bill J
March 27, 2017 12:03 pm

If climate scientists truly understood what they were modeling they would only need ONE model. Using 50 models proves that they don’t have nearly enough understanding to create an accurate model.

BTW 2016 was a below average year for wildfires in California in terms of acres burned despite the exceptional drought. I believe 2015 was also.

March 27, 2017 12:03 pm

I am stunned such drivel is allowed to be published. I personally did a download of all rainfall for california since 1850 when records have been kept. The recent drought was NOT particularly severe. The average drought lasts 4 years and xummulatice rainfall for this drought is well above several others. There is nothing record setting or extreme about the drought. It may have been perceived as worse than it was because there are more people living in california which puts a huge increased demand on water but through various means california has also increased its water supplies.

We know that extensive study has been done of storms and drought and floods and there is no evidence ive seen and there are studies that show over and over that there is no increase in these events. In fact for many of the events we’re seeing decreases. So this is utter indefensible garbage propoganda. Yet no one even makes the slightest attempt in the media to call Mann on the over the top statements.

Of course this is also a long long long line of “news stories” that basically are “we looked at our climate models which have no accuracy for anything” and using them can show proof positive that this will occur even though nothing we ever predicted from these models ever came to pass.

Unbelievable.

Frank
Reply to  jdm064
March 29, 2017 3:12 pm

JDM064: Your statements about the recent California drought (2012-2015) appear seriously. The state received the 3rd least amount of rainfall since 1900 in 2014. 1924 and 1997 received modestly less rainfall than 2014, but were (with the exception of 1976) surrounded by year of near normal rainfall. During the four year period 2012-2015, the southern half of the state received an average of 37-50% of normal rainfall and the northern half 50-62% as much as normal, making it the worst four-year period since 1900.
comment image
comment image

Drought is frequently defined as a combination of lack of rainfall and increase in evaporation due to high temperature and or wind. The higher temperatures in recent decade have made combined indices of drought even worse than the deficit in rainfall.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Bishkek
March 27, 2017 12:04 pm

“The unprecedented 2016 California drought”

What, at all, was unprecedented about the 2016 California drought?

Well, I will tell you because based on observations and written records, you wouldn’t notice anything unprecedented about it. The unprecdentedness was that it was the first short term Calilfornia drought that was blamed on anthropogenic global warming.

If you have never read anything about the history of California droughts and floods, you might be conned into believing that it was something ‘unusual’ and ‘unprecedented’. Otherwise, you will know immediately that the claim is a load of horse puckey.

May a funding drought linger over the brows of the sources of this particular road apple.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo but really in Bishkek
March 27, 2017 2:24 pm

I think I remember reading that the last bison died out in Southern California around 1400 AD as a result of a major drought.

Aphan
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
March 28, 2017 2:28 pm

I’m trying to work on my ability to “Mann up” (even though I’m a woman). Clyde’s statement about bison seems like a good opportunity to practice.

Since today, in 2017, the precedent is that bison do not live in Southern California…if I was to see a bison in Southern California, it would be scientifically accurate to state that it was “unprecedented event”, and I could write a paper, have it peer reviewed, and published, and the scientific world would send out a press release claiming “Global Warming causes unprecedented citing of bison in Southern California”.

How did I do?

troe
March 27, 2017 12:06 pm

We do know that a fellow who made his fortune in the oil business is funding the Center at Penn State right. Check yourself Dr. Mann.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Bishkek
March 27, 2017 12:08 pm

In another example of Mannian Claims, Al Jazeera is running a piece that claims that anthropogenic global warming is causing a rise in the water level and consequence beach erosion in LAKE MICHIGAN! Probably exacerbated by errant jet streams making the waves they showed us.

I guess sea level rose to overwhelm Niagara Falls and reach Saulted Ste Marie while I was away in Bishkek. I had better hurry home to bail out the cellar.

Svend Ferdinandsen
March 27, 2017 12:15 pm

It looks like circular arguments.
Climate change changes the jet stream that causes extreme weather that is a sign of climate change.
All the times we have nice and normal weather, is that also because of the jet stream and climate change?
“Global warming theory is in fact so malleable that it predicts anything. More cold, less cold. More snow, less snow.

What a powerful theory.” Roy Spencer.

Reply to  Svend Ferdinandsen
March 27, 2017 1:24 pm

Indeed. A theory that predicts everything predicts nothing.

Reply to  Menicholas
March 27, 2017 1:53 pm

I’ve noted for years that a change in jet stream location is good for about a 10 or 15F change in temps South of Lake Erie, when it’s north, we tend to get air out of the gulf, warm and humid, and when it’s south of us, it’s 75 or 80F summer afternoon temps, with low humidity. And it’s entirely reasonable that just a shift in the jet stream, altering the ratio of tropical vs non-tropical air masses due to the direct the wind blows, would explain all of the warming.

So Mikey is taking stuff that actually caused what was reported as climate change, which was actually natural ocean cycles, and turns it into more fake panic.

Paul Maxit
March 27, 2017 12:18 pm

Just hilarious :

1/ You program the models so that they takes into account as “feedbacks” the supposed greenhouse gases effect on extreme weather.

2/ You run the program and find out that greenhouse gases create more extreme weather.

What a joke.

Has Mann read Marcel Leroux, he would have learned that Jet Streams are just the consequence off the lower level circulation, and especially Mobile Polar Highs strength, speed, and direction, which are more speedy, numerous et large in winter time.

TomRude
Reply to  Paul Maxit
March 27, 2017 2:17 pm

Had Leroux been read by many, the CAGW scammers would have never been successful in brainwashing people.

March 27, 2017 12:48 pm

I’ve been telling you all about jet stream variability for the past 10 years. Initially AGW was supposed to push the jets poleward into a more zonal pattern but I pointed out that since 2000 I had noticed increasing meridionality.

The variations appear to be solar induced:

http://joannenova.com.au/2015/01/is-the-sun-driving-ozone-and-changing-the-climate/

March 27, 2017 1:02 pm

Do these people actually believe this rubbish? If they do, they must be so intellectually challenged that getting up in the morning and going to work would present serious obstacles.

More likely, they are cynically trying to manipulate public opinion by the endless repetition of “extreme weather” and “unprecedented” until it becomes accepted as fact. What is frightening is how many people seem to have already accepted that this stuff is real.

Aphan
Reply to  Smart Rock
March 28, 2017 2:37 pm

Good call Forrest! Trump Rolls Back Obama Era Climate Change Policies!

March 27, 2017 1:06 pm

It was a combination of El Nino’s, and a positive AMO, and there was a change that led to the step during 2000, you can see the change here.
I started showing this off a couple years agocomment image

https://micro6500blog.wordpress.com/2016/05/18/measuring-surface-climate-sensitivity/

Reply to  micro6500
March 27, 2017 1:21 pm

The step change around 2000 also coincided with increased global cloudiness as per Earthshine data. Thus I formed the view that global cloudiness is controlled by the level of jet stream zonality / meridionality because that changes the length of the lines of air mass mixing. That idea is much preferable to the rather woolly Svensmark idea relying on cosmic rays increasing cloud condensation nuclei.

March 27, 2017 1:33 pm

A bit OT, but a comment on the settled science:
“… a new study in Nature finds that approximately half of the platelets found in the human bloodstream are created in the lungs. If accurate, this is a striking correction of the longstanding medical opinion that platelets — essential components in the clotting process that stops wounds from bleeding — are produced in bone marrow. (See examples of the consensus here, here, here, and here.) Happily for the study’s authors, their field isn’t climatology. So they can expect to be saluted for usefully challenging what was thought to be settled science, not condemned as “deniers” for questioning a popular consensus…”

Sorry, but the links don’t seem to have copied over.

Here is the new study:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature21706.html?ex_cid=SigDig&s_campaign=arguable:newsletter

And here are the four consensus links:

https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=160&ContentID=36&s_campaign=arguable:newsletter

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3069519/?s_campaign=arguable:newsletter

https://www.ouhsc.edu/platelets/platelets/platelets%20intro.html?s_campaign=arguable:newsletter

http://www.hematology.org/Patients/Basics/?s_campaign=arguable:newsletter

Looks like classical science is still alive somewhere.

fah
March 27, 2017 1:52 pm

I am convinced.
Rahmstort clearly must know his stuff.
Just look at all those hardcover journals and books he sits in front of and must use a lot for great thinking.

knr
March 27, 2017 2:02 pm

said Michael Mann, if he said it was raining you go outside and check for yourself
anything he gets his fingers on you can take a sick joke at best .
Still given all the court cases his involved I am surprised he has got the time.

Aphan
March 27, 2017 2:13 pm

Someone translate how the bolded words affect the first sentence?

“We came as close as one can to demonstrating a direct link between climate change and a large family of extreme recent weather events,” said Michael Mann, distinguished professor of atmospheric science and director, Earth System Science Center, Penn State. “Short of actually identifying the events in the climate models.”

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Aphan
March 27, 2017 3:57 pm

Maybe he means that random extreme weather events are too chaotic to model correctly, so we’ll just attribute them to climate change.

GREG in Houston
March 27, 2017 3:04 pm

They did not say they had discovered anything revolutionary, only that ““We came as close as one can to demonstrating a direct link…” But of course, no one can in fact demonstrate such a link.

fretslider
Reply to  GREG in Houston
March 27, 2017 3:36 pm

no one can in fact demonstrate such a link.

The Guardian quotes Mann thus, “Human activity has been suspected of contributing to this pattern before, but now we uncover a clear fingerprint of human activity” It seems pretty sure!

Meanwhile the BBC has this…

Science is facing a “reproducibility crisis” where more than two-thirds of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments, research suggests.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39054778

But don’t worry, climate science seems is in the clear, this is frustrating clinicians and drug developers who want solid foundations of pre-clinical research to build upon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39357819

Reply to  fretslider
March 27, 2017 4:01 pm

“Human activity has been suspected of contributing to this pattern before, but now we uncover a clear fingerprint of human activity”

Only because they planted the fingerprint in both the data and the models, well duh!
I can show warming from co2 for most land surfaces has to be less than half the estimated forcing, and it’s likely not different over water.

Hugs
Reply to  GREG in Houston
March 28, 2017 11:54 am

This is very much like socialism was in the seventies. There were departments at universities filled with communists that could not tolerate any criticism against the Soviet Union.

They were wrong.

They are also all green now. They are wrong again.

Gerald Machnee
March 27, 2017 3:20 pm

The dates:
Received:
03 January 2017
Accepted:
20 February 2017
Published online:
27 March 2017
So was it peer reviewed? Was it even pal reviewed, the more likely choice?
Of course CBC will pass anything on if it is AGW or CAGW.

James at 48
March 27, 2017 3:37 pm

Read all about it …. killlllllllllerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy geeeeeeeeeeee doubllllllllle youuuuuuuuuuuu …. WILL cause more killllllllllllllllerrrrrrrr torrrrrrrrrrnadoooooooooooes …. killlllllllllllerrrrrrrrrr blizzzzzarrrrrrrrrrrrrds …… heat waaaaaaaaaaaaaves …… hailllllllllllllllll ….. fllllllllloodingggggggg!!!!!

Read all about it!

Reply to  James at 48
March 27, 2017 6:04 pm

Might want to have that keyboard looked at.

Aphan
Reply to  Menicholas
March 28, 2017 2:40 pm

It’s been caused by global warming. Everything is.

Pop Piasa
March 27, 2017 4:20 pm

Wow! Jet streams were identified by science less than a century ago and we already know everything about the phenomena.
Too bad gravity research hasn’t been as expeditious.

March 27, 2017 4:52 pm

Having lived in California, most of the time in Southern California, for 61 years, I can assure everyone that this last drought was not “unprecedented”. California has a long history of cycles of 2 to 7 years of drought usually followed by a year or two of torrential rainfall, and then settles into a few years of normal rainfall. I’m no scientist, but I can and do observe what is happening around me and have a memory that lasts more than 10 years. The current water crisis here in California was caused by Governor Moonbeam the first time he was governor. See, I do remember. His father Governor Pat Brown implemented the California Water Project to increase the storage capacity of dams across the state. Shasta Dam was supposed to be 20 feet higher than it currently is as an example. When Moonbeam took office in the ’70s, he cancelled the California Water Project. We need a “Brownout”!

James at 48
Reply to  oneblockwonderwoman
March 27, 2017 4:58 pm

Yep, a real drought would be like one of the mega droughts during the 1st Millennium AD.