# Proof Narrative: Extreme weather events (hurricanes, wildfires, floods) have become dramatically more frequent and intense solely because of climate change.

## Verdict

**Verdict: DISPROVED**

Climate change is a real and significant driver of extreme weather — but the claim goes further than the science does, and that extra step is where it fails.

## What was claimed?

The claim is that hurricanes, wildfires, and floods have all become dramatically more frequent and more intense, and that climate change is the *only* reason why. This kind of statement circulates widely in discussions about climate policy, and the core concern behind it — that our changing atmosphere is making weather more dangerous — is well-founded. But the word "solely" carries a heavy load, and it's worth asking whether any serious scientific source actually says that.

## What did we find?

The short answer is that no major scientific institution uses "solely" when explaining extreme weather trends. Four independent authoritative sources — spanning federal agencies, peer-reviewed research, and the world's leading intergovernmental climate body — all explicitly name non-climate factors as contributing causes.

For hurricanes, NOAA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, the leading U.S. center for hurricane-climate research, points out that the increase in Atlantic tropical storm frequency since the 1970s has been "at least partly driven by decreases in aerosols from human activity and volcanic forcing." In other words, clean air regulations that reduced pollution also changed how much sunlight reaches the ocean — a factor entirely separate from greenhouse gas warming.

For floods, the U.S. Geological Survey is direct: "Urbanization generally increases the size and frequency of floods." When cities replace forests and fields with pavement, rainwater that would have soaked into the ground instead runs off immediately. This happens regardless of whether precipitation is increasing. More people living in developed areas means more exposure to floods even with no change in rainfall at all.

For wildfires, a 2024 study in PNAS Nexus found that wildfire risk "lies in the confluence of climate change and development in the WUI" — the wildland-urban interface, where housing has expanded into fire-prone landscapes. Decades of fire suppression policy has also let fuel accumulate in forests. Neither of these factors is a consequence of greenhouse gas warming.

And then there is the IPCC itself — the scientific consensus document that climate advocates most often cite. Its Sixth Assessment Report attributes observed changes in extreme events to "human influence (including greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions and land-use changes)." That parenthetical matters: three distinct categories of human influence, not one.

There is a further wrinkle beyond the "solely" question. Global hurricane *counts* have not clearly increased at all. NOAA GFDL notes that global tropical cyclone frequency data "do not show evidence for significant rising trends." Heat extremes, heavy rainfall, and wildfire area have increased — but not all three event types named in the claim have become more frequent.

## What should you keep in mind?

None of this means climate change is not a serious problem or a major driver of extreme weather. The evidence strongly supports climate change as a significant contributor to more intense hurricanes, longer fire seasons, heavier precipitation events, and more severe heat. The scientific consensus on that is robust.

What the evidence does not support is exclusive causation. Aerosol chemistry, urban development, land use choices, and fire management policy all independently shape the trends we observe. Removing climate change from the equation would improve things considerably — but removing the other factors would too.

It is also worth noting that the four sources used here are among the most credible available: two U.S. federal agencies, a peer-reviewed journal published by Oxford University Press, and the IPCC. These are not contrarian or fringe sources. They are the same institutions that document climate change's real effects most carefully — and they all reject sole causation.

## How was this verified?

This proof identified four independent authoritative sources that explicitly document non-climate drivers of the three event types named in the claim, exceeding the threshold of three required for disproof. Full methodological details are in [the structured proof report](proof.md) and [the full verification audit](proof_audit.md). To inspect or reproduce the evidence-gathering process, see [re-run the proof yourself](proof.py).