By Jim Steele
Daniel Swain is a good meteorologist but being a protégé of infamous climate alarmists like Noah Diffenbaugh and Michael Mann, he frequently spreads climate alarmists’ propaganda. His latest paper pushes the narrative that global warming is increasing dangerous “Hydroclimate Whiplash” fear mongering there is a increasing shift between wet years and dry years.
While wet years are confidently determined by measuring precipitation, dry years are determined by estimating changes in evapotranspiration which cannot be measured directly. There is no change the variability of precipitation during California’s rainy season. The inability to measure evapotranspiration creates great uncertainty in Swain’s estimation of dryness trends and his so-called whiplash effect.
Swain argues that floods and droughts are made worse by global warming because a warmer atmosphere can hold more water vapor. However, that is an irrelevant science factoid. The huge flaw in his argument is that the atmosphere cannot absorb any more water vapor no matter how warm, if the moisture isn’t available.
Moisture availability depends on the dynamics that transport water from the oceans to the land. Simply consider the fact that despite very warm temperatures in the Sahara Desert, its warmer temperatures do not increase the rates of desert precipitation or rates of evaporation. It is the Sahara’s dryness that causes such hot temperatures.
First consider that natural El Nino-La Nina Oscillations (graphic A) are a major driver of the earth’s wetness-dryness variability. While an El Nino event brings heavy rains to the western America, it causes drought in Indonesia. El Nino events happen every 3 to 7 years causing natural inter-annual wet-dry variability. Furthermore, El Nino activity has increased over the past 6000 years as global climate has cooled, long before any changing trends can be explained by rising CO2. The Pacific Ocean also experiences El Nino-like conditions that last 20-30 years before switching to La Nina-like conditions, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
El Nino-La Nina oscillations also drive the Indian Ocean Dipole (graphic B), causing extreme wetness that alternates between eastern Africa and the Indonesian Islands. El Nino-La Nina Oscillations also affect climate in the Atlantic by strengthening or weakening the North Atlantic’s subtropical high pressure (graphic C). La Nina events strengthen the pressure system moving its center westward.
That shift causes wetter conditions in the eastern United States as atmospheric circulation drives more moisture westward. In contrast El Nino events weaken the pressure system causing drier conditions by shifting rainfall eastward.
Finally consider the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ graphic E) as a major driver of natural wetness-dryness variability. The ITCZ forms where northern and southern trade winds converge. That convergence drives moisture laden air upwards where it cools so that the moisture rains out. Over 30% of the earth’s rainfall happens beneath the ITCZ. The remaining air is now dry and circulates to the north and south. Where that dry air descends, it brings dry weather which generates most of the world’s deserts.
The ITCZ moves north and south mostly following the seasonal path of the sun’s direct rays (graphic F). As graphic D shows, the ITCZ’s position has shifted over thousands of years as well as over decades. As a result of the ITCZ’s more northerly location, more moisture reached the Sahara, transforming it into a lake-filled savannah supporting abundant wildlife and human tribes. As the ITCZ migrated southward as the earth cooled starting 6000 years ago, fewer rains reached the Sahara re-creating a desert.
Likewise, ITCZ migrations affect where monsoon wetness will occur. In addition, the ITCZ affects the intensity of El Nino and La Nina.
Swain sadly ignores these major drivers of natural wetness-dryness variability, preferring to blame global warming. Thus, Swain and his fellow climate alarmists fail to educate the public about the known reasons for natural wetness-dryness variability. Addicted to a belief in a global warming climate crisis, alarmists prefer to blame a warmer atmosphere’s ability to hold more water vapor. Thus, they can conveniently maintain their crisis narrative that paradoxically argues CO2 warming can cause both wetter and drier conditions and dry the landscape causing more fires. It is bad science, dedicated to pushing a bogus climate crisis agenda.






I’ve noticed that it begins to dry up after the rain stops.
Indeed. The large amount of brush on the California forest floors, large because of neglect by local and State governments, drys out and is ready to burn no more than 10 hours after the rain stops. It is likely brush that started and sustained the terrible LA fires until it got to houses. Thereafter, the houses sustained it themselves unrestrained by a to-small and to-often waterless LA fire department.
is a good meteorologist but
A warmer atmosphere holds more water… Californians take note. Where is that extra water?
The damned snail darters drank it all. 😁
LA could certainly use that water.
Does the upwards blip around 2,000 years ago perhaps suggest why at that time Carthage, on the North African coast, was such a powerful although ultimately defeated civilization in opposition to Rome?
What fascinates me is what happened to make the Sahara so dry when it used to have hippos and lakes and crocs and trees and all, only 8000 years ago?
For those that need a refresher:
Saudi Aramco World : Last Lakes of the Green Sahara
“He is … the nation’s leading scientist.”
Interesting descriptor. Is it an elected post?
“Leading” is code for “climate crisis true believer.”
Leading idiot is more like it.
Not a refresher to me. All new. Many thanks.
A probable explanation is that periodic changes of obliquity and precession move the ITCZ significantly more north and south, depending on where they are in their endless process. a stronger process than the changes Jim pointed out, 6000 to 7000 years ago, according to what I’ve read here and there, summer insolation at 65 degrees north was around 65 watts/sq meter higher than at present.
Story tip
https://www.forbes.com/sites/amandakooser/2025/01/20/meteorite-impact-caught-on-ring-camera-shattering-sound-and-all/
Look at that video really closely. I wish I could slow it down but I think in one frame at the 4-second mark (0:04/0:26) you can actually see the meteor to the center-right, just before it becomes a meteorite.
Is there proof it’s a meteorite? I’d think one would have broken that stone pavement. It wouldn’t shatter like glass. Or is this a joke?
Just going by the video. I agree with you that something like that should probably at least cracked the pavement. The article says it was checked out by a University of Alberta meteorite expert, though.
Given the types the “media” labels as “experts” these days, color me unimpressed.
I wondered why there was no fireball of any sort. If friction is cause high in the atmosphere there a few yards from ground should have lots of friction.
Good point. And seeing tons of meteors over the years (mostly at night) I wondered the same thing. Can only speculate but maybe either atmospheric friction had slowed it down enough just before it hit or it was small enough and daylight was bright enough to wash it out. Also, may have been a fireball higher up when the meteor exploded but was too high to be captured by the camera. Maybe there are more fragments in the area.
I’m sure the compliment to Mr. (Dr.?) Swain is a professional courtesy and maybe he is a really good person, but I don’t see how anybody who pushes a dangerous fear-mongering narrative can also be a good meteorologist.
The problem with the claim that warmer air can hold more water is that while it is trivially true that warmer air does hold more water, it is also true that as long as the air stays warm, it will continue to hold that water. Unless the air cools, it will continue to hold that extra water.
Thanks, Professor Jim!
It’s so nice to have a guy who does science, but without the corrupted computer models and the adjusted surface temperature data sets! Biology, chemistry, geology, et. al.; also known as science in the REAL world!
“Hydroclimate whiplash” is just the latest in the Scawwy Words Contest run by GangGreen! ‘Tis a far better thing to panic children into a life of fear and mental health issues; then to allow the possibility of “the Sahara…transforming…into a lake-filled savannah!” Wouldn’t that be just awful for those who live there!
“Hydroclimate whiplash” is just the latest in the Scawwy Words.”
In climate evangelism it’s not the science that matters it’s the sound bite.
I’ve added it to my list:
Heat dome
Polar vortex
Atmospheric River
Bomb cyclone
Hydroclimate whiplash
New words for not new phenomena.
I quite like “flash drought” for a couple of dry days 🙂
How about we just aum it all up?
Flash bullshit!
Isn’t that just a synonym for “advertising”?
“Flash drought” is a real term or it was last year. WUWT even had a couple of articles about it.
Lets call it what it really is. Climate Hiroshima.
I mean, lets not be trivial when we need to invent adjectives to describe weather. Because that’s what alarmists do. You can’t be an alarmist without ringing a bell.
An “Alarmist Scientist” is a quack, and the phrase is an oxymoron.
Whiplash…
The fossil fuel industry donated $75m to Trump’s campaign.
Trump signs order to withdraw US from Paris climate agreement for second time https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/20/trump-executive-order-paris-climate-agreement
Kamala blew in excess of a cool $1 billion..
Imagine the good Kamala’s $1,000,000,000 could have done applied to clean water and nutrition in poor countries. She should be charged with genocide.
If only she and her ilk would.
And Elon Musk has over $100 billion. So by your logic he is 100 times more guilty of genocide since none of that money goes towards clean water and nutrition in poor countries.
The difference is Elon is building things while Kamala just pissed away a billion to achieve nothing.
I see remarks like yours regarding lots of rich folks. Most have donated more money to health activities than their critics can contemplate. I do not know what, when, or if Musk has or will make such contributions. We do know that he makes things happen, employs people, and he, they, and the companies all pay taxes.
Here is a link to one list {use the bathroom before you sit to read it}:
Microsoft Word – Kroc donations master list for web.doc
And it is only one short part of one Family.
John, you stated the Kamala was guilty of genocide because she didn’t donate enough money from her campaign. So all I want to know if that same logic applies to other billionaires? Exactly how much do you have to donate to charity according to you before you shouldn’t be charged with genocide?
Your irony meter and funny bone are broken. Pizza off.
That is money people gave her for a specific purpose. She can’t or at least shouldn’t spend it in other ways than for her election campaign.
Remember, other than making possible bribery and theft, all that campaign funds can do is purchase advertising and pay the production overhead.
If you think big money in politics is bad, then stop watching your TV propaganda machine. After all, the same people advertise on FOX and MSNBC simultaneously.
I’ll make a note of that here in London.
Dr. Cliff Mass notes on his own blog that he has been banned from Daniel Swain’s weather blog. Others with contrary opinions have also been banned. No surpise there, eh?
That’s all the Climate Nazis have. Silence the opposition so people only hear *their* “message.”
Because their arguments sink quickly under the withering fire of logic, reason and reality. (No pun intended)
On a brighter note I can almost taste those salty tears the last couple of days (not literally) and it makes my day. To think Kama lama ding dong could have been in charge is mind boggling.
Daniel Swain is still young. I wonder what he will have to say as an octogenarian?
In 2065 he will say:
“Relax, folks. This has happened many times before.”
Doesn’t seem to go that way… Stanford University professor Paul R. Ehrlich
Octogenarian? Aren’t they supposed to submit to carousel?
The brown dry air arrows point to the middle of Australia and the middle of North Africa. Its genius. Dry places have dry air.
Much of the Midwest is under an Arctic cold outbreak. I wonder if the CO2 ppm is the same as when is it warm.
I actually put a real blanket in my car in case I got stuck somewhere. It warmed up about 44F from the low this morning, and it’s still cold. CO2 isn’t doing it for me.
Story tip Civil War?
Reeves faces battle with Khan over Heathrow expansion
Chanecellor’s plan to back third runway risks splitting the Cabinet over net zero opposition
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/01/21/rachel-reeves-battle-sadiq-khan-heathrow-expansion/
He is correct that warmer weather tends to be wetter weather … but that has exactly zilch to do with damaging storm.
Consider both the geohistory of the Earth, which had a relatively warm and wet and very stable climate for tens of millions of years until the beginning of the Pleistocene. Also consider other planets in our solar system that have atmospheres. The most violent, unstable atmospheres are on extremely cold planets located vastly farther from the sun than is the Earth – specifically, Jupiter and Saturn. The most stable atmosphere in the solar system, aside from Earth, is Venus … where the planet is extremely hot with atmospheric temperatures measured in hundreds of degrees F, yet the average wind speeds there are close to zero, vastly less than on Earth.
What drives big rainfalls and thunderstorms and hurricanes is not warm air. What causes atmospheric instability is driven by the meeting of warm air with very cold air … whether via adiabatic cooling as warm air rises to where moisture condenses … or when tropical cyclones serve to transfer warm air energy to cold areas further from the equator. In a warming planet, the differences in temperature of air masses, whether vertically or latitudinally, are reduced, actually serving to calm storms by reducing atmospheric energy transfer.
Very nice Jim.Swain may be a good meteorologist I don’t know. However that doesn’t say anything about what kind of man he is. Saying things that you and people like you can show are clearly wrong is not a good thing. That would make me question what kind of man he is. Scaring the crap out of people for no good reason is a bad, bad thing. I have no respect for people who do that.
Facts/evidence are used conditionally by those who are wedded to an ideology which is why their claims fails badly while the true scientist following the “scientific Method” will fail and succeed in their Reserarch efforts towards a better understanding of the topic at hand because there are using facts/evidence in a manner by the value it contains.
Taken from Swain et al, 2025:
In this Review, we examine how hydroclimate volatility is anticipated to evolve with anthropogenic warming.
I wonder if the hydroclimate volatility would be reduced if the warming was natural?
Anyhow, Swain et al do offer some adaptation options. The one of particular interest is the “sponge city”.
More technology-intensive interventions include forecast-informed reservoir operations (in which dams are operated in close consultation with meteorologists to use short-term weather forecasts to maximize water storage without increasing subsequent flood risk, as well as the development of sponge cities designed to decrease the fraction of impervious surfaces to increase infiltration of precipitation into the soil column, yielding the dual benefits of decreased pluvial flood risk and increased aquifer recharge.
Imagine that – dam operators taking note of weather forecasts – what a good idea! /s
Swain has actively promote himself as the “go to climate scientist” for Climate Crisis journalists, happily supplying quotes to order (at least, so it seems).
A journalist needing a quote blaming fires/floods/earthquakes/heat/cold/rain/drought/twinkies on climate change can just call Swain and he supplies.
I have a whole file on Swain — and someday will write about the nuttiness he has been offering journalists as quotes.
I look forward to see your compilation. But it is not just Swain promoting himself. Michael Mann had a lot to do with promoting Swain, and Mann’s group long ago created a “climate clearing house” for journalists to go to when the journalist knows squat about the science.
Nice global discription! Thanks.