[firestarter223]

If you point out recent coldness records, you will be lectured about the difference between weather and climate. I think the real issue may be the human delusion that things staying the same is normal (perhaps because of the short life span of humans), and more recently in scientific terms, that averages are normal.

About this article I find it odd that it cites Thatcher, of all people. Surely the information she used in the 80ies is outdated by now, and she presumably never was a climate researcher.

[throwaway5752]

Localized coldness records that are the result of the polar vortex breaking apart over the arctic and sending masses of cold air south. They are accompanied by heat waves and records in the arctic. The 80s information and forecasts were actually pretty decent in terms of the observed warming levels so far. What is a shame is that they were not pessimistic enough regarding the feedback loops we are now aware of.

[firestarter223]

Especially if you can pick just the forecasts that are not already wrong, and forget about the rest.

According to this article in nature, there is rather a tendency to use worst case scenarios that are no longer probable.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00177-3

[ZoomerCretin]

Both events are caused by the jet stream changing its usual patterns due to climate change. Your strawman is a poor one.

[firestarter223]

I guess no matter what happens, it is always due to climate change.

In general I think local records are to be expected, because of variance. Maybe they become more frequent because of changing jet streams or whatever, but you can not go in the other direction and claim every record is because of climate change.

[timeon]

Well obviously things generally are not static. However I'm afraid you have forget to include scale there.

[firestarter223]

In what sense? Because global warming happens faster than expected? Maybe - but such local heat events are not a good way to determine that.