As a meteorologist, it's the weather that fascinates me most. I think there is a lack of appreciation for what global warming really is. Temperature is the measure of kinetic energy Of particles. Air with a higher temperature has a higher kinetic energy (faster moving particles). So global warming really is an increase in the global average available kinetic energy in the Earth's atmosphere. When written in more scientific terms, it becomes obvious that global warming should lead to more vigorous weather events - more kinetic energy, the more powerful atmospheric phenomenons that can be achieved.
It's very hard to pin 2015 weather anomalies on global warming. Confounding variables (ex: El Nino, and to what extend did GW cause the EL Nino) reign. But I think it's safe to speculate we've canceled the next ice age.
The kinetic energy of macroscopic motions in the atmosphere is most probably not simply related to total kinetic energy of molecular motions (which is many times higher), but is rather linked to the intensity and location of air heating due to radiation and air humidification due to oceans. For example, the air in my room (windows and door closed) has, in a simple model, around 10 MJ of kinetic energy of molecular motion. Since the convection is weak, the kinetic energy of macroscopic motion is many times lower, probably less than 1 J. When I open the window and let the dense cold air in, the hot air gets out and much stronger convection sets in. The macroscopic kinetic energy is now much higher than before, both due to higher density and higher speeds of flow, but still nowhere near those 10 MJ. As a result, I have more energy in the room, but lower temperature. Of course, the weather is much more complicated, but you get the idea.
It's very hard to pin 2015 weather anomalies on global warming. Confounding variables (ex: El Nino, and to what extend did GW cause the EL Nino) reign. But I think it's safe to speculate we've canceled the next ice age.