I don't the parent is attacking global warming. The headline doesn't lineup with past temp records. Is there something in a dust bowl heatwave that could help explain why it is virtually impossible when it clearly isn't?

When something like global warming become a religion any comment perceived as attacking itself no matter how innocent and truthful will bring out zealots looking to defend their faith. I think we should keep religion out of science.

The parent's link doesn't contradict the headline, indeed it backups up the headline shows that the coastal weather of BC is 10F higher than continental highs in the 30s

Portland reached 116F recently

https://www.oregonlive.com/weather/2021/06/portland-records-...

Here's Portland since 1938

https://projects.oregonlive.com/weather/temps/

This has Portland yearly records going back to 1875

https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/OR/Portlan...

There's no evidence to say that the 1930s were higher in the Pacific North West (which reached a high of 105 in 1935), or that it's ever been 110, let alone 115

The 1936 records were lower. They were in a different region with different climate. And human activity was part of why they happened.

You should probably give some sort of reasoning behind your comment else it's just the opinion of a random stranger.

His argument was that the dust bowls themselves were a dramatic climate impact, caused by human activity, in a short time.

Justify yourself.

It is, however, a good argument against this article.