No USA Today, Associated Press, and Others, Record Cold and Snowfall in the United States Aren’t Caused by Climate Change

polar-vortex-132409047_m

Lately, a series of mainstream news outlets, including USA TodayAP NewsBBC Future, and Fast Company, have churned out articles claiming that January 2025’s record cold and heavy snowfall across the United States are to greater or lesser degrees due to climate change, or at least that such a connection can’t be ruled out. This is false. Their arguments hinge on the increasingly popular yet scientifically dubious idea that climate change is disrupting the polar vortex, causing frigid Arctic air to dip southward into mid-latitude regions like the United States. While this explanation is neatly packaged to fit the narrative that “everything bad is caused by climate change,” the science backing these claims is weak, unsubstantiated, and is riddled with contradictions.

The notion that extreme cold spells are a product of global warming flies in the face of both historical records and atmospheric science fundamentals. These stories rely on cherry-picked data and untested theories while ignoring decades of meteorological knowledge about natural climate variability. As outlined below, there is no solid evidence to support these claims. Instead, the mainstream media’s claims rely on flashy headlines and alarmist language, leaving out inconvenient facts that undermine their sensationalist conclusions.

Let’s start by summarizing the claims made in these articles:

  1. USA Today describes the recent Arctic blast as being caused by a disrupted polar vortex, which it links to melting Arctic ice supposedly induced by human-caused climate change.
  2. AP News echoes similar ideas, suggesting that rapid Arctic warming leads to instability in the jet stream, allowing cold air to “spill southward.”
  3. BBC Future goes further, calling this phenomenon “climate instability,” implying that climate change makes extreme cold more likely by destabilizing established weather patterns.
  4. Fast Company takes the same approach, arguing that “climate change is making the polar vortex worse,” a claim that is not only speculative but also directly contradicted by other climate studies.

A close examination of these claims, of the link between variations in the polar vortex and climate change, reveals glaring problems with the logic and science behind these claims.

The polar vortex is a long-established, well-documented feature of the upper atmosphere—known decades before politicized climate scientists and media mavens began talking about climate change. The polar vortex was first described in 1853, but the term became popular with the media in 2014 after a cold snap in North America. The polar vortex is a large-scale low-pressure system that forms in the stratosphere over the polar regions during the winter. Its strength and position are influenced by a variety of factors, including natural atmospheric variability like the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) and the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO).

Courtesy: National Science Foundation – National Science Foundation: Scientists Verify Predictive Model for Winter Weather, Public Domain.

When the polar vortex weakens, it can allow colder Arctic air to drift into mid-latitude regions, resulting in frigid weather and snowstorms. This weakening isn’t some newly minted phenomenon tied to climate change; it’s part of natural variability. Similar cold outbreaks were documented in the 1970s, long before CO2 levels became a focal point of global policy discussions. In fact, those cold outbreaks then led many climate scientists to start warning of a coming ice age. Obviously, that never happened.

There is, in fact, no consensus within the scientific community about a link between Arctic warming and polar vortex behavior. As Climate at a Glance discusses, empirical data shows no consistent trend in the frequency or intensity of polar vortex disruptions over the past several decades. This contradicts the claim that polar vortex weakening has become more common due to human-induced warming.

If we set aside the speculation for a moment and look at actual data, the picture becomes much clearer:

  1. Arctic Ice Trends: While Arctic ice has experienced periods of decline, recent measurements indicate that the Arctic is not in a “death spiral.” In fact, since 2012, Arctic sea ice extent has been relatively stable during winter months. The claim that melting Arctic ice is destabilizing the polar vortex simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny when examined against actual sea ice trends, as pointed out at Watts Up With Thatwhich cites government data.
  2. Cold Extremes in Context: Historical weather data reveals that extreme cold events in the United States are neither new nor increasing. Cold outbreaks similar to the current one have been documented regularly over the past two centuries, at least, including the brutally cold winters of the late 19th and mid-20th centuries. Documentary evidence from the 18th and 17th centuries show extreme cold spells were common even then. The recent cold spell is notable, but it is not unprecedented.
  3. Jet Stream Variability: Claims that the jet stream is becoming “wavier” or more unstable due to climate change are also unsupported by solid evidence. A 2021 study in the journal Geophysical Research Letters found no statistically significant increase in jet stream waviness or meandering in recent decades. As Climate at a Glance: The Polar Vortex shows jet stream’s behavior, like the polar vortex itself, is driven and sustained by natural atmospheric patterns.

These media articles also conveniently ignore the inconvenient fact that climate models—touted as the gold standard of climate science—struggle to accurately simulate the behavior of the polar vortex. If the models can’t reliably predict polar vortex behavior in a warming world, how can we credibly link this year’s cold snap to climate change? The reality is that most of these claims are based on post-hoc rationalizations rather than sound science.

Take, for example, the so-called “warm Arctic, cold continents” hypothesis often used to explain these events. This theory posits that warming in the Arctic destabilizes the polar vortex, leading to more cold air spilling southward. However, studies such as those by the American Meteorological Society, titled “Evidence Against a Physical Link Between Arctic Amplification and Mid-Latitude Weather“, have found that the connection between Arctic warming and mid-latitude cold outbreaks is tenuous at best. Simply put, the hypothesis lacks predictive power and is contradicted by many observational studies.

Additionally, another relevant study is the 2019 paper in Nature Climate Change, titled Projected weakening of the stratospheric polar vortex in response to rising greenhouse gases by Amy Butler and Lorenzo Polvani, which shows that while some climate models suggest changes in polar vortex strength under warming conditions, the actual observed link between Arctic warming and mid-latitude weather is inconsistent.

In short, based on existing research and data, there is no clear cause and effect connection indicating climate change is causing a shift in the polar vortex, its frequency, its strength, its regularity, or pattern of impact.

It’s worth noting the sheer irony of claiming that record cold is caused by global warming. Multiple times in recent decades the mainstream media has warned of the “end of snow,” declaring that snow would become a thing of the past due to rising global temperatures. A notable example is a 2000 article in The Independent claiming that “children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” Also, articles published in the New York Times in 2014 and 2024 also warned of the snow’s end due to global warming. Yet here we are in 2025, witnessing some of the coldest and snowiest winters in recent memory, and the narrative has conveniently shifted to now blaming extreme cold and snow on global warming. This blaming of contradictory weather phenomena—no snow/record snow, weakening monsoons/strengthening monsoons, the Atlantic current speeding up/the Atlantic current slowing down, increasing drought/increasing rainfall—should raise red flags about the credibility of these claims.

Conclusion: The media is pushing a narrative at the expense of science

What we’re seeing here isn’t science; it is narrative-building. Recent years’ record cold and snowfall in the United States are not proof of climate change but rather evidence of natural variability at work—variability that has been part of Earth’s climate system for millennia. If anything, the rush to blame every cold snap on “global warming” aka climate change underscores the increasing desperation of a narrative that has lost its grounding in reality and credibility.

It’s time for journalists to stop treating speculation as fact and for readers to demand accountability in climate reporting. Climate change happens, but there is no evidence of a crisis. Also, interpretations of short-term weather events to promote ideas of catastrophic climate change, because they ignore data and long-standing meteorological knowledge, don’t inform but rather mislead, in the process eroding trust in science and journalism while unnecessarily alarming the public.

Anthony Watts Thumbnail

Anthony Watts

Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute. Watts has been in the weather business both in front of, and behind the camera as an on-air television meteorologist since 1978, and currently does daily radio forecasts. He has created weather graphics presentation systems for television, specialized weather instrumentation, as well as co-authored peer-reviewed papers on climate issues. He operates the most viewed website in the world on climate, the award-winning website wattsupwiththat.com.

Originally posted at ClimateREALISM

5 23 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

48 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
January 26, 2025 6:15 am

“Bad weather is caused by not paying enough taxes”?

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 26, 2025 7:03 am

Or by not cutting out enough beating hearts on top of the pyramid.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
January 26, 2025 7:26 am

It is Republican politicians gathered around a cauldron summoning up storms . . .

OweninGA
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 26, 2025 12:28 pm

But are they the same weight as a duck?

(I am sometimes prone to misquoting Monte Python…)

January 26, 2025 6:48 am

Old hat:

Laws of Nature
Reply to  Steve Case
January 26, 2025 9:45 am

The believe expressed in the older video above is directly countered by the NASA polar vortex simulation group:

!!! I am happy that I found this paper, not only it confirms what I just wrote about CMIP5 being wrong (they dont they it, they say “different results coming from it”), but it also summarized the results of their efforts:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2024JD040823
“”Constraining future changes in SPV and reducing the large uncertainty projected by climate models remains challenging. “”

This is a direct comment from them on the question if global warming will strengthen or weaken the aortic polar vortex! If you happen to believe that even their newest models still don’t capture much of the real world that statement only gets stronger!

Reply to  Laws of Nature
January 26, 2025 1:12 pm

aortic polar vortex

Talk about a cold heart…

J Boles
January 26, 2025 6:53 am

When they started claiming OPPOSITE effects from C02 that is when I knew it had become a religion. Floods and droughts, heat and cold, more and less…

John Hultquist
Reply to  J Boles
January 26, 2025 8:10 am

. . . and swarms of locusts.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  John Hultquist
January 26, 2025 8:37 am

Dogs and cats, living together!

Reply to  J Boles
January 26, 2025 12:11 pm

If it causes everything then it is the cause of nothing.

abolition man
January 26, 2025 6:59 am

Like the theory that saturated fat causes heart disease, modern Gorebull Wurming seems to be mainly a bunch of glad handing opportunists, torturing their data until it fits their assumptions!
While the heart/health hypothesis has tortured, maimed, and killed millions around the world, the Climate Hoax has the potential to do far more damage if it is ever fully codified into government policy! Stop the Hoax! CO2 to 800ppm!

Scissor
January 26, 2025 7:39 am

Nothing says climate change like hunting alligators in Greenland.

Reply to  Scissor
January 26, 2025 8:19 am

In the Eemian we had Hippopotamus, elephant and rhinos in Derby England.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 26, 2025 8:37 am

They’re called MPs now.

January 26, 2025 7:53 am

The “it’s cold because of global warming” nonsense meme is circulating on Facebook, too. It smacks of desperation.

czechlist
Reply to  Paul Hurley
January 26, 2025 12:23 pm

The more often a stupidity is repeated, the more it gets the appearance of wisdom.
Voltaire

I'm not a robot
January 26, 2025 7:54 am

In the winter of ’78-’79, the temperature never got above 0 F for a span of 28 days in Potsdam, NY. THAT was a polar vortex!

I lived in Buffalo in ’77. THAT was a blizzard.

NOT to say they were anything but weather.

Reply to  I'm not a robot
January 26, 2025 11:51 am

jet-stream-1977
Reply to  bnice2000
January 27, 2025 3:26 am

Notice the path of the southern jet stream: Right along the southeastern coast of the United States. Right where all the snow fell. It appears that the southern jet stream is the cause for all the “record” snows from this storm.

January 26, 2025 8:00 am

 “…eroding trust in science and journalism while unnecessarily alarming the public.”
That is the point of the exercise, after all, to destroy trust in existing institutions and exploit fear to establish new authoritarian ones. The problem is that reality is hard to hide with so many available counter-forces, like WUWT, that refuse to play along. The longer the drama drags out, the more it is exposed to its own inconsistencies. In the world of depeche mode (not the band) it just becomes boring if nothing else.
Even Greta seems to be moving on to better things, like Palestine.

Reply to  Mark Whitney
January 27, 2025 3:30 am

Good comment.

John Hultquist
January 26, 2025 8:08 am

By line: 20 miles northwest of Philadelphia:
The Valley Forge winter refers to the period from December 19, 1777, to June 19, 1778, when the Continental Army, led by George Washington, encamped at Valley Forge during the American Revolutionary War. This challenging winter …

strativarius
January 26, 2025 8:36 am

BBC Future: every bit as ludicrous as BBC Verify.

From the blatant bollox corporation.

jvcstone
January 26, 2025 8:38 am

When a reporter uses the term “unprecedented”, it usually means “not in my life time” Seems that the older I get, the less “unprecedented” extreme weather events become. I well remember snowball fights in the middle of Guadalupe Street in Austin TX. back in the 70’s, and the creeks in my native Philadelphia freezing solid enough to ice skate on for months at a time back in the 50’s and early 60’s.

OweninGA
Reply to  jvcstone
January 26, 2025 12:32 pm

You would be surprised that many of these reporters are actually old enough to have experienced these events before, but are paid handsomely to forget their experiences.

Eamon Butler
Reply to  jvcstone
January 26, 2025 3:33 pm

The modern day definition of ”unprecedented” is ”not since the last time”

Reply to  jvcstone
January 27, 2025 3:37 am

“When a reporter uses the term “unprecedented”,”

Yes, everything to climate alarmists is either “unprecedented” or “historic”.

Weather history disproves most “unprecedented” and “historic” claims about the weather. Yes, we have extreme weather today, but we had similar extreme weather in the past.

Trying to connect CO2 to extreme weather events is a losing proposition. But that is all the climate alarmists have left so we can expect to see a lot of it in the future.

January 26, 2025 9:21 am

One thing I would like to see, particularly in headlines, is a return to calling it Global Warming instead of Climate Change. They changed the narrative to Climate Change precisely so that any event, even a cold snap, could be attributed to climate change.

Calling it Global Warming makes attributing a cold snap to it look particularly absurd. To anyone who says the proper term now is Climate Change, the instant reply is yeah, but the globe wasn’t warming so they changed it. Kinda manipulative don’t you think?

We need to reclaim the vocabulary.

Laws of Nature
January 26, 2025 9:22 am

If you were to make arguments in favor of man-made global warming, it seems hard to imagine a tougher topic than weather extremes caused by arctic vortex anomalies!

With both solar and volcanic correlations with vortex anomalies well established, but no visible (aka potentially anthropogenic) long term trend, the data could not be clearer stack against climate alarmism!

However, (and to some extent that is even scientific) that does not stop them from producing “hit pieces” drowning clear experimental papers with measured correlations in tons of simulation based alternative solutions. When sorting through this please keep in mind that CMIP5 and older simulations are not based on established physics!

The climate alarm community almost proudly touts how the models before that important change in the cloud micro physics (which took place for the CMIP6 models) also produced trends seemingly close to measured values. This is nothing to be proud of, but actually very concerning .. what does it mean when non-physical models produce believable trends?
=> They only reflect the belief of the caster, just like bone oracle and tarot readings!

Likewise this shots down many of those CMIP5-simulation based articles on global warming potentially affecting polar vortex anomalies.

January 26, 2025 9:23 am

The Earth is still in a 2 million-year Ice Age named the Quaternary Glaciation in a cold interglacial period that alternates with very cold glacial periods. The Ice Age won’t end until all natural ice melts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation

Reply to  scvblwxq
January 26, 2025 11:55 am

We are really lucky to live in what is called an Interglacial..

… albeit at a rather cool period of that interglacial, barely a degree or so above its coldest.

taxed
January 26, 2025 9:46 am

Here in the UK we get the same false claims from the BBC news and weather
Just recently the BBC weather website made a claim that the decline in the number days of snowfall the UK has been due to human caused climate change. Utterly rubbish.
They cherry picked the data so it would fit their warming narrative.
They started with the 1960’s which along with the 1940’s was the snowest decade of the 20th century and finished with the 2000’s one of the least snowest decades on record. Because they knew if they had included the most recent 30 year period (1991-2020) then that data would not have fit the narrative.

January 26, 2025 11:24 am

An increase of 100 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere over 100 years causes weather systems to deviate thousands of miles from where they normally track because it causes the jet stream to deviate.

That is what you must believe in order to buy into this theory.

Bob
January 26, 2025 11:45 am

Very nice Anthony. We need to move away from the term climate change. Climate change can mean anything therefore it is meaningless. We know what the CAGW clowns mean when they refer to climate change, they mean CO2 causes all the bad things that happen. We need to force them to admit that is what they mean. CO2 is a greenhouse gas and does help keep the planet from getting too cold. There are limits to its effectiveness and everybody needs to be made aware of that. CO2 is not capable of causing a crisis the way they are saying it will.

January 26, 2025 11:53 am

I dunno man, according to the media *everything* is caused by climate change. I’m pretty sure climate change is to blame for giving me headaches. Every time I see an article on it in the media, I just know it’s going to end in an Aspirin.

January 26, 2025 11:57 am

claiming that January 2025’s record cold and heavy snowfall across the United States.

That “record cold” needs to be enclosed in”scare quotes”!
What records?

captainjtiberius
January 26, 2025 12:29 pm

I see that Lake Erie is 81% iced covered. Now that’s global warming too?

January 26, 2025 12:44 pm

Snowfall records across the Northern Hemisphere will be a feature of weather reporting for at least 5,000 years. Earth is at the early stage of the coming glaciation.

This is the inevitable consequence of increasing peak solar intensity warming the oceans adjacent to land that is below freezing. Warmer oceans means more atmospheric moisture and it comes down as snow when the land is below freezing.

The reason I know this is because it is the way glaciation has repeatedly occurred over the past 800,000 years.
comment image?ssl=1

January 26, 2025 1:31 pm

“January 2025’s record cold and heavy snowfall across the United States”

Not so true in New England. Been cold but not record cold and very little snow.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 27, 2025 3:55 am

Yes, this isn’t a very strong arctic cold front and it is mostly confined to the northeast US.

The reason for the big snow down south is because this cold front ran into the southern jet stream along the southeast coast of the US, which pumped in a lot of moisture, which resulted in a lot of snow.

The southern jet stream configuration is also the reason most of the United States, at least the south-central and western parts, are experiencing mild weather this winter.

son of mulder
January 26, 2025 1:37 pm

It’s a vortex, the atmosphere is chaotic, why should there be a pattern?

January 26, 2025 2:33 pm

The Artic blasts of 1895 and 1899 were amazing at it went down into southern Florida and other southern states.

Wikipedia

Great Freeze

LINK

NOAA

The Great Arctic Outbreak of February 1899
LINK

Florida’s Worst Freezes

LINK

Mr Ed
January 26, 2025 4:23 pm

Galveston Bay has a well documented historical record of freeze ups. 1820’s, 1860’s, 1880’s
1890’s. It’s of a brackish water and has a location called Freeze Point. The media should
hire some middle school kids to do their research.