> What about acknowledging the effects of improper land management (forestry, rivers, etc)?

Those are indeed a factor, and European nations as well as the EU have started programs to counter those 20th century artefacts (see "Renaturation"). But the amount of rainfall itself (measured) was extremely high, by any standard. The mediterranean sea was between 2 and 4 deg C warmer than usual, causing increased evaporation and in turn increased precipitation across Europe. (This has been widely reported)

I think that’s more of a topic for impacts to places like California and the Gulf Coast that have been heavily built up over the past fifty years despite their known issues with fires and hurricanes, vs the places in Europe impacted by these floods that have been occupied for many hundreds of years.

"X% of the variability in flooding explained by climate change, regressions show" probably failed the A/B testing for engagement.

Totally agree, climate change is highlighting the places we messed up but had enough stable weather patterns to hide it.

Lots of areas are getting absolutely flooded around Europe and it's basically because they drainer or changed the water courses, as well as making everything flat and smooth for (over)farming.

And then you get a week of rains and everything goes tits up.

If you are not the lazy one - what are those proper land managements? There were trees falling (not just in the cities) in Slovakia because it rained in one day like in a whole year.

> Do we just blame every "natural" disaster on climate now?

No.

> What about acknowledging the effects of improper land management (forestry, rivers, etc)?

Those are acknowledged, and there needs to be more focus on it.

Was there anything else, or is this just a blatant attempt at spreading doubt about climate change?

That's the only way to get funding.