This is related to Hansen’s loaded dice article where he showed that 3-sigma very-hot seasonal anomalies are now much more likely than the half percent they used to be
Which just might begin to hold water if a causal link between a small radiative imbalance and stalled high-pressure systems could be shown – otherwise we’re just playing apples and oranges here.
And why the qualification of “areal coverage”? Of course, if 3-sigma events increased in number then they would no longer be 3-sigma events. So he needs to throw in meaningless qualifications to make it seem like it means something. Even ignoring that, why are we not seeing a commensurate increase in 2-sigma events, for instance?