Hi mhaze,
Glad to be of service.

It's called Chapter 10,

"Detection and Attribution of Climate Change: from Global to Regional"
http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/

Also note:

“Climate change, whether driven by natural or human forcing, can lead to changes in the likelihood of the occurrence or strength of extreme weather and climate events or both. Since the AR4, the observational basis has increased substantially, so that some extremes are now examined over most land areas. Furthermore, more models with higher resolution and a greater number of regional models have been used in the simulations and projections of extremes. {1.3.3; Figure 1.9}

P134 “By definition, the characteristics of what is called extreme weather may vary from place to place in an absolute sense.“

916 says: “Because most of this large-scale warming is very likely due to the increase in atmospheric GHG concentrations, it is possible to attribute, via a multi-step procedure, some of the increase in probability of these REGIONAL events to human influence on climate. We conclude that it is LIKELY that human influence has substantially increased the probability of occurrence of heat waves in SOME LOCATIONS.“

Mhaze

In one of your posts you brought up Lake Mead. Lake Mead has been in a parlous state for some years due to drought.
Parts of the South Eastern States of the US have been impacted by drought and extraordinary rainfall. You can argue about semantics forever; except, whats happening in the real world is contrary to what you say.

Meanwhile, debate is progressing elsewhere about whether all, or most, multi year ice is going to be lost prior to the refreezing of Arctic sea ice. Currently, sea ice extent is at the second lowest ever recorded.

Another region has been in the news lately; the Third Pole.

Siberia has been in the news in relation to thawing permafrost, and anthrax has become a problem at three spare locations as a result of the thawing.

It is not long ago that Great Britain was hit hard by extraordinary storms. A centuries old stone bridge was ruined as a result.

mhaze

Current science reviews suggest you are wong hanging onto IPCC misinterpreted views.

http://gizmodo.com/noaa-expect-more-extreme-flood-events-in-the-future-1786333685

The first sentence of the reference states:

"Extreme, catastrophic flood events like the one that swamped Louisiana last month are becoming more likely because of climate change, according to a hot-off-the-press analysis by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)."

There is nothing ambiguous about that sentence.

Bigmouth O’Reilly, you have now demonstrated your complete ignorance of the law of defamation, , as well as your ignorance of climate science.
You have not posted any reference to science which shows any measurable human effect on climate.
Your response to that indisputable observation had all the brilliance of a delinquent school child:”Liar”, was his pathetic response. No reference to where he had posted the reference, because there is no such reference. Just another of bigmouth's lies. He is determined to convince us of his dishonesty and incompetence.

struth Max, its like drawing teeth, without anesthetic...but more fun.

Where, specifically, in Chapter 10 does it say anything like "the report itself shows the regional modelling to be SUPERIOR to and the PREFERRED METHODOLOGY to the inferior global model".

oh and just by-the-by, I wasn't originally talking about global models, but global data. I wonder if you understand the difference.

ant,

"In one of your posts you brought up Lake Mead.'

Nup, never happened.

You've fabricated so much stuff over the past year, perhaps you'll understand why I no longer bother with your baseless assertions.

@Max Green, in attempts to educate the 'Fur King More Rons' (FKMR) in the Applied Idiot's Federation of Research Fellows working for the People's Freedom Front for Global Lunacy about complex science in IPCC Reports eg Global vs Regional Climate dynamics, here's a new study @RC: An update on mid-latitude cyclones and climate change http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/09/an-update-on-mid-latitude-cyclones-and-climate-change/

For example:

Why is it so hard to say what the future North European climate will look like? A recent review paper by Shaw et al, 2016 explains the reason in persuasive terms.

The North European climate may be regarded as the weather statistics for over this region.

They argue that there is a “tug of war” between various conditions which will affect the outcome for future mid-latitude storms as well as the jet stream.

In other words, the projection of future storm tracks is highly sensitive to aspects that are not so accurately quantified by the global climate models.

The question is where, how strong, and how frequent will these storms be in a warmer world.

There has been a view that regional climate model results will be used if they are readily accessible through a data portal such as Copernicus in Europe.

An analogy for data portals is the drug stores, which often require a prescription from a doctor before selling a drug to avoid misuse. Medicines also come with labels.

but for decision-makers, it’s a question of risk management and there is some useful information to act on.

A factory shut-down due to flooding in e.g. Bangkok may affect an economic chain, and persistent drought may trigger migration.

[end quotes]

a comment by Walter Hannah says:
"Some of the robust mechanisms that we see on a global scale are really hard to see on a regional scale, even though we know they have to be at play at a fundamental level. And when we think we have a robust conclusion, there’s no way to know if it’s just a weird byproduct of multiple remote biases in things like SST or cloud fraction."
-
mhaze, Leo Lane, Marohasy et al are FKMRs!
-