Thanks, Charles!

And also: Thanks, Sean Nelson!

I hypocritically comment under "Stranger" articles, but I actually agree that it would probably be better if "real news sites" did away with them. It's one of the reasons I have a lot more respect for "The New Yorker" than I do "The Atlantic" (fewer clickbait articles and better writing by the journalists being a couple others). As Sean points out, there have always been ways to contact the news source with tips, critiques, and compliments. For discussing the article with fellow readers, there used to be... cafes.

Charles, your fruitless crusade to get Cliff Mass to politicize (and thereby undermine) his scientific statements isn't just shameful, it's played out. You lost.

Cliff Mass, of course, does believe that climate change is occurring, and that it is caused by humans.

Charles Mudede is a cowardly propagandist who will not pick up a telephone, call Cliff Mass, and ask him if he believes climate change is occurring and caused by humans.

@2: It's also scientifically accurate to say that no individual lung cancer can be shown to be caused by cigarettes. But we don't have the diagnostic tools to prove that in any case so...what's the point? It just muddies the waters about a clear and present public health threat. Same thing with climate change.

Cliff mass is absolutely giving his scientific opinion when he says the cause of a given individual weather event can't be attributed to climate change. Scientists can and do offer their expertise in venues that are part of any peer-reviewed process-- e.g. courts of law.

Charles Mudede does not want Cliff Mass to say "this individual weather event will (or will not) move aggregate statistics in the direction that contributes to data showing the climate is warming."

Charles Mudede instead wants Cliff Mass to say certain individual weather events are caused by global warming, and, of course, to absolutely not say that certain specific weather events do not contribute to statistical evidence for global warming).

@5 Gee, it's almost like the intended audience of Mass's blog is somebody other than the scientific community. Tell me again why only Chaz gets a free pass to write junk science?

@5 should have been @4.

@MajordomoPicard

Chaz gets a free pass because he is not a scientist, but rather a bumpkin, the sort of person who still needs to see signs written in the sky, and can not cope with big piles of numbers. Or he is a condescending propagandist who regards his audience as bumpkins of this sort. Take your pick.

And that should have been "are not part of any peer-reviewed process" up there, oops.

Sadly, only @4 states the facts. Mass claims on his blog that these extreme events are mostly due to natural variability. Where are the peer reviewed citations supporting such claims?

I went to Mr. Mass's lecture tonight in Port Angeles. He indicated July 2016 was hot because of El Nino. Also, the climate of 2080 will be about the same as the weather during the summer of 2015.

But he absolutely believes Global Warming is occurring. The solution to Global Warming is decreasing global population and increased technology for developing nations.

Seemed legit.

**He also does not read the Stranger.

@9

The citations appropriate for scientific papers are in scientific papers. The body of work supporting Mass's refusal to attribute individual small-timescale weather events to global warming is substantial, and petulantly demanding a summary of the whole corpus every time Mass puts up a new blog post isn't making you look like the smarter side of the argument.

When I was a kid we used to call the hot time of the year "summer". BBQs, late, lazy nights watching natures firefly-lit shows over southern summer greenery. The sounds of radio shows and laughter of reminiscing adults talking about simpler times on front porches and in back yards. At least I can remember and ponder those times and say I enjoyed them before Earth goes by way of Mars.

Just a reminder, Cliff Mass is perfectly reasonable in his reluctance to attribute individual events to global warming. Also, there's a difference between individual events and the warming trend displayed in the embedded figure.
Don't be a dickhead about climatology, Mudoodles.

@13: You want I should change your face around?