Bad headline: Violent spring does not signal climate change

Why is it bad? Take a look at the article itself (emphasis added):

"You cannot take any events in a single spring and say that is definitely a result of climate change," said Jessica Rennells, a climatologist with the Northeast Regional Climate Center at Cornell University.

[...]

Extra moisture and energy in a warmed atmosphere are a sign of a changing climate, said Rennells, but there is no clear link between such changes and increased tornadoes. The violent, localized storms need a special kind of wind shear to form, along with warm humid air from the south, coupled with a cold front to causes air to rise and rotate at the same time. There is no proof that these factors are influenced by climate change.

That view was echoed by Paul Roundy, an assistant professor in the Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences Department at the University at Albany. "We can't say that even one season of enhanced weather activity is linked to climate change. You have to look over a series of years."

So the headline writer looked at all that hedging and qualifying by the scientific types ... and then made a definitive statement. HONK.

Woulda been OK: Violent spring may not signal climate change. Violent spring does not definitively signal climate change. Violent spring not proven to signal climate change. Not OK: the headline above.