add five California charts at end of article
NOAA Confirms Heatwaves Declining In California:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/statewide/time-series/4/tmax/3/8/1895-2020?base_prd=true&begbaseyear=1901&endbaseyear=2000
A summary of climate trends in California from a few years ago:
https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/ca/
see charts below
Heat waves peaking in the 1930s, followed by a much colder climate between the 1960s and 80s. The two years of 2017 and 2018 were warm too.
NOAA’s maximum temperature graph is averaged over the whole summer, so won’t necessarily reflect the heatwave patterns. NOAA’s graph of extremely hot days does however pose more questions about the reliability and accuracy of their monthly temperature records.
Current California drought trends are little different to most of the 20th century. Looking further back in time, California has suffered much more severe droughts for most of the last millennium. There are about 20 distinct peaks and troughs over the last 1,000 years which is in line with the rule of thumb that climate cycles are about 50 years long, rather than the 30 claimed by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) as their definition for climate, rather than "weather".
Since 2000, the longest duration of drought (D1-D4) in California lasted 376 weeks beginning on December 27, 2011 and ending on March 5th, 2019.
https://www.drought.gov/drought/states/california
If climate science contains a drought effect from global warming, they should predict it before it happens and not after it happens. Climate alarmists did make such a prediction for “the American Southwest”, but it didn’t happen. Climate alarmists ignore history, and ignore skeptics when they reference climate history. Climate alarmists live for always wrong wild guesses of the FUTURE climate!
Remember the COVID pandemic model wild guesses of deaths, that ld to harsh government actions based on forecasts deviating so far from previous trends, that no sane person should have considered them a remote possibility?
NOTE:
A
Scientific American article that I didn't believe inspired this
article. SA also took the outrageous step of backing one candidate in
the 2020 U.S. presidential race, not President Trump ... while
professing a one sided view of the climate predictions (always negative
about the wild guessed future climate). They are not alone in tainting
science with politics, and publishing dangerous politically motivated
statements.