It’s saying it’s incredibly unlikely this would happen without anthropogenic assistance. Like, really obviously saying that. What is not helpful is this intentional obtuseness.

Any scientist who is 100% certain about a hypothesis is either lying or a fanatic. Theres no such thing as absolute certainty in reality.

For the record they specified that the heat in China would be a 1 per 250 years event without climate change (1 per 5 years with), and the US and Europe “virtually impossible” without, and 1 per 10 years with.

I think that contrast should speak pretty clearly to everyone except the deniers, who can’t be convinced with facts anyhow. From being virtually impossible to happening once a decade, or from happening every 250 years to happening every 5 years.

I’ve been surprised to not see a bunch of ‘b-b-but it’s only this this hot because of el nino’ nonsense when talking about the current phase of our active climate crisis. Like, yeah, it’s hotter because of the global weather phenomenon that occurs every few years but that’s on top of everything else happening. We may not end up hitting record temps when we’re back in La Nina (but the storm damage will be fucking devastating). But next time around it’s just going to be like this but way way worse as the ocean continues dying, bad algae blooms, good algae withers, and co2 continues to get pumped into our atmosphere with little reprieve.