Earlier today we had our first “GROAN” press release. Hot on the heels of it, comes this nonsense. Have a look at the idiotic figure provided, it’s as if we never had a heatwave, forest fire, storm, or hurricane before.
From the “Peer-Reviewed Publication” makes anything A-OK, especially when models are involved department, and Uppsala University:
Multiple extreme climate events at the same time may be the new normal
Heatwaves, droughts and forest fires are some of the extreme climate-related events that are expected not only to become more frequent but also to increasingly strike at the same time. This finding emerges from a new study led by Uppsala University, in which researchers have mapped the impact of climate change in different regions of the world.
In a new study published in the journal Earth’s Future, researchers from Uppsala University and Belgian, French and German universities have shown that in the near future several regions of the world will no longer just be affected by isolated climate-related events. Instead, several different events will occur concurrently or in quick succession.
“We have long known, for example, that there will be more heatwaves, forest fires and severe droughts in many regions – that in itself is no surprise. What surprised us is that the increase is so large that we see a clear paradigm shift with multiple coinciding extreme events becoming the new normal,” says Professor Gabriele Messori, the study’s lead author.

Using models to predict the future climate – temperature, rainfall, wind and so on – is a common method in climate research. In this study, the researchers have gone a step further by feeding that data into additional models that deliver information on the concrete impact on society. By calculating the effect of climate change on, say, the risk of forest fires or floods, a clearer picture emerges of how different regions of the world might actually be affected. The analysis examines what will happen between 2050 and 2099. The researchers looked specifically at six types of events: floods, droughts, heatwaves, forest fires, tropical cyclone winds and crop failures.
Heatwaves and forest fires a recurrent feature
The study shows that combinations of heat waves and forest fires will increase sharply in almost all regions of the world, except where there is no vegetation, as in the Sahara. Heatwaves and droughts will become a recurrent feature in areas such as the Mediterranean region and Latin America. Areas that now generally experience isolated events, such as the Nordic countries, will also be more frequently affected by heatwaves and forest fires in combination.
“The summer of 2018 in Northern Europe was characterised by unusually high temperatures and widespread forest fires – which at the time was regarded as an exceptional event. In a few decades, it may not be so unusual,” says Messori.
Poses new challenges for preparedness
The researchers’ analysis covers several possible emission scenarios. However, the main focus is on a medium scenario, which is considered realistic given current emission trends.
“It is important to emphasise that this shift that we see does not only occur if we look at the most extreme case, where we do nothing to reduce our emissions, but also if we consider a less pessimistic scenario. From a societal perspective, we need to broaden our preparedness to deal with these co-occurring extreme events. We are going to face a new climate reality that we have limited experience of today.”
Journal
Earth’s Future “Global Mapping of Concurrent Hazards and Impacts Associated With Climate Extremes Under Climate Change” https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025EF006325
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
A ‘model’ using output from another ‘model’? What can go wrong?
Everything.
There is absolutely no problem with this method
IF you gt the uncertainty and error progression right!
(in case you want to attribute your fantasy world to the real universe)
uh.. let me guess what is missing in this paper..
RCP 8.5 strikes again…
Better question: what can go right?
Which helps explain why their dire predictions don’t come true.
Most of these “looking into the future” papers are full of ifs, ands, mights and shoulds. This one seems much more sure of things.
So what are the Dow Jones and the Footsie going to do tomorrow?
Don’t know, Prof. Messori?
But you must know, you say you know what the weather is going to do in 50 years time.
I’d settle for a good 3 day weather forecast.
Or a 10 day forecast that doesn’t change radically several times a day.
I’ve noticed that the 3 day forecasts are usually very good. Thanks to good weathermen like Anthony.
Well, I would be happy to find the effect of two scenarios discussed by them, the minimum and maximum measured average cloud coverage trend
(I just learned it is −0.28% and −1.47% per decade)
https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/15/15/3819
“De-seasonalized anomalies of global mean total cloud amount (%) derived from four cloud CDRs as well as from MODIS-Aqua and CALIPSO. The trends in CLARA-A3, PATMOS-x, ESA-CCI, ISCCP-HGM are −0.76%, −0.28%, −0.82% and −1.47% per decade, respectively.”
There is of course no indication that either is correct or applies for the next decades, but it would allow to see a range for their predicted extreme weather rate as a first rough estimate of the uncertainty of their simulated results… short of such a test (or similar) it seems quite meaningless..
We had another article on this very recently.
Please don’t confuse climate with science. The alarmists do this all the time. Aren’t we supposed to be better?
All one needs to do is to remember, “climate” is to science as “witch” is to doctor.
And “coulds”- which is when I stop reading.
Yuh, we could have “extreme climate-related events” all at once. Maybe a flood and a drought and a forest fire and heat wave and advancing glaciers. Sounds like “the 7 horses of the apocalypse”. A climatista Revelation. Be afraid. You must panic! THE OCEANS ARE BOILING! 🙂
Funny how none of those things are “climate related.”
It seems that these so-called climate scientists get their ideas from watching disaster movies…
The DOI link at the foot of the article is broken.
fixed
Models, all the way down.
“the main focus is on a medium scenario, which is considered realistic given current emission trends“
I thought this might be documented in the DOI link but reached a dead end. The word “realistic” refers to the scenario but did they use realistic emission trends? If so — so what? Who decides what is realistic?
“ will happen between 2050 and 2099.” I’d like to be around in 2050+ to ask these authors why the things they predicted didn’t happen, but alas I won’t be here. Younger readers inherit the task.
Summer heat, winter cold, seasonal fires, drought, and non-tropical strong winds are common in Central Washington State. Notable change would be for less of these, otherwise no one will notice.
Fires are neither weather or climate.
You don’t need to wait until 2050, just look back 50 years and look at some of those predictions and compare with now.
arctic ice free etc.
Yogi Berra: “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.”
Here in the UK, we are having a cool wet start to June average mean temperature 13.5 C
But all the long range models have been showing high pressure and very warm dry weather.
but the short range forecasts do not confirm this.
It seems the models are biased toward high pressure and very warm weather.
Oh noes. You took Western Australia’s weather. How dare you? 😉
The Quality of these Climate Crisis distortions of reality is really going downhill.
I wish I was one of you young whipper snappers that come here to enhance your understanding of climate and weather.
Imagine; before you reach your 50’s and early 60’s, you can enjoy the schadenfreude of mocking all the old geezers that were promoting Climate change back in the 20’s and early 30’s.
Now that’s a prediction I’ll vote for!
Where do failed Computer Scientist find work? They go to work creating climate models that give the same results for any input and call themselves Climate Scientist.
If I lived in a model world I’d be worried. I don’t, I live in the real world and worrying about something we have absolutely no control over is a waste of time. Everyone should just try their best to be prepared for natural disasters.
With an emphasis on “natural” because that’s what they are- not man made like war and other cruelty.
Total b*ll sh*t. Is there no way to make published results verifiable, validated and not total crap..
And in other news, THE SKY IS FALLING.
Henny Penny’s real name is Casandra…
Using models
Don’t forget to take an average….
Ever since our warm and very dry spring in the UK, BBC weather has gone into climate crisis mode. Where evertime there is a risk of temperatures going above 25C, its treated as extreme and worthwhile of headline news.
Is the above a guarantee or just a prediction? If it’s a guarantee, we should quickly relegate it to the failed prediction junkbox along with the New Ice Age ones we heard in the 1960s. And for further failed predictions, all we have to do is consult the Predictions section of WUWT’s website, and we”ll find that we’ve got little to worry about since we’ve proved to be creative and resourceful enough to meet most of the challenges apparently posed by climate change. Maybe that’s the reason that global populations, life expectancies and agricultural output, among other positive occurrences, have continued to increase during the past century-plus.
It’s always the same thing:
BS + BS + BS = no more fossil fuels.
This result made possible by researchers living in countries with no fossil fuels of their own and pretending that they use no fossil fuel products whatsoever. But it will continue as long as governments are willing to shell out tax-payer money to grifters to produce this tripe.
““The summer of 2018 in Northern Europe was characterised by unusually high temperatures and widespread forest fires – which at the time was regarded as an exceptional event. In a few decades, it may not be so unusual,” says Messori.”
The official Met Office UK climate projection is for 2003/2018 intensity heatwaves every other year by 2050.
2018 was the same type of discretely solar driven heat event as in 2003, 1976, 1949, 1934, and a couple of remarkably mild winters in 1659 and 1686 in the Maunder Minimum. 1659 + 317.7 is 1976, and 1686 + 317.7 is 2003, a 317.7 year cycle of the three inner gas giants. The next one of that heat event type is in 2045. The next one of the hotter 1540, 1757, 1936, and 2006 type, is in 2116.
We were actually very fortunate to have had several major heat events during a centennial solar minimum.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQemMt_PNwwBKNOS7GSP7gbWDmcDBJ80UJzkqDIQ75_Sctjn89VoM5MIYHQWHkpn88cMQXkKjXznM-u/pub
I have nothing to say, these guys have lost, they know it.
You know a clairvoyant would be cheaper for such predictions and they are both about the same scale of testable..
The difference is that a clairvoyant is sometimes right.
Obviously written by the supremely ignorant and gullible GHE cultists.
Climate is the statistics of weather observations. It is not possible to predict future atmospheric states. Adding CO2 to air does not make it hotter.
Anyone claiming to be a “climate scientist” is either a fraud or a fool.
I seem to remember a recent Italian, peer- reviewed paper finding (from actual data -remember that?) that the ”increasing catastrophic extreme weather” from climate breakdown….is not evident. Lol.
Using model outputs as data….what could go wrong?
I guess we need to prepare for snow storms during heat waves now.
Saw one of those just last week. It was too warm for the snow to reach the ground so we experienced it as rain. Must be the “intersectionality” of “climate change.”/sarc
They’re going full hysterical. Hopefully that fever will pass soon- probably as soon as they realize their nations are broke and collapsing- like a person with a serious disease- before it’s cured, they may have to first get very, very ill.
THERE ARE NO “CLIMATE EVENTS.”
Just WEATHER.
Climate used to be over a looooong period of time.
Now it’s just the average over 30 years. That average came to be referred to as “Normal”.
So, of course, they say there’s a “New Normal” every 30 years, not just for a local area but for the entire globe.