Climate change made European heatwave up to 3°C hotter

Now we have days with 37 and 38 C every summer, sometimes even 40 (we are in south europe).

There is more temperature increase needed though for the majority of the country to become apricot (or even wheat) growing, and so if you've noticed Russia doesn't waste time/effort on climate talks/etc. - it pumps the oil like crazy instead, tries to develop its North/East and builds new weapons, including the systems intended for the North/East territories which are going to become more used (and contested) with the coming and increasing warming. For those who know the Russian jokes, that is an optimistic version of the future. Never mind some minor bumps along the road https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/oct/14/thawing-perma...

"almost 60% of all buildings in Norilsk have been deformed as a result of climate change shrinking the permafrost zone. Local engineers said more than 100 residential buildings, or one-tenth of the housing fund, have been vacated here due to damage from thawing permafrost."

While I too think it's warmer now where I live, and in the winters it definitely is, your anecdote does not show much.

https://i.imgur.com/wolGEz3.png

So while global temperatures may have been rising, they have been flat for Bucharest.

The fact that you think it has been getting warmer for you there, however, is an interesting point about media effects and mass psychology.

EDIT: Here too, is the same data station after Berkeley's data quality process has been applied: https://i.imgur.com/LvmbD9v.png No comment.

Romania is an example of a country that has developed a lot in the past few decades. I'm inclined to think that people can now afford AC, rather than that it's necessary. It's really nice having a cool place to work and sleep in, it really improves the quality of life, so when people can buy one, they would.

I don't know about the historical price of ACs when corrected for inflation, but it almost certainly didn't go up, and Romania doesn't have the temperatures they have near the equator. Those few degrees due to climate change is probably not the reason why suddenly a lot of people decided to buy one.

or maybe cellphones?

I'm not sure what you're referring to, and I'd love to read up on it if you have a source?

I wouldn't put too much stock on the exact predicted delta, but more on the direction and rough order of magnitude of the change.

The results of these models are usually compared with actual data from the real world, very much like in astronomy or geology. If a model doesn't agree with reality, it gets discarded pretty quickly.

In fact, that is what the researchers did in this case: They applied several statistical models of weather extremes to both models and real data and compared them. Every model that failed to predict the actual measured heat wave went out.

That seems like a good way of establishing a baseline, and gives high confidence in the predictive power of the remaining models.

You could argue about how the weather data was selected, and how it was compared with the models. But that is already a discussion about details of the specific study. This one is a collaboration between multiple reputable institutions, so it is pretty safe to assume sound practices.

Notably, the fact that you actually know about statistical abuse in science shows that the scientific process is working as intended: Results are public and therefore can be and are scrutinized. More important stuff also receives more scrutiny, less important stuff can go unchecked until it is cited more often.

But eventually errors will be unearthed and accounted for.

Here is a skeptic's analysis of the NOAA & IPCC data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ag3D0rjGuc