While this statement is largely true, it is important to note that 14 years is a relatively short time period climatologically speaking. Moreover, this paragraph largely glosses over the key finding of this study which that temperature increases ALONE (i.e., in absence of changes in precipitation) are likely to cause a runoff reduction of about 6-7% per degree Celsius of warming.

This means that there is increased certainty that the southwest US will experience more severe droughts in the future, even if there is heightened uncertainty in climate model regional precipitation projections.

True, but in the spirit of transparency, some forecast only 1.5 -3 degrees of warming.

Wet years may actually be "wetter" than today due to the fact that a warmer atmosphere can hold more water (For example, Rasmussen et al, 2011) So, it's likely that we'll see occasional news reports concerning record snowfalls, or record annual snow accumulations in the Rocky Mountains, even as the region drys out and becomes increasingly prone to extended droughts.

This is true even if there is no large scale change in overall precipitation in the watershed. Warmer temperatures will both increase local evaporation rates, and cause an earlier and reduced snowmelt season. Both of these mechanisms reduce the availability of snowmelt runoff through the summer.

This is true, but it is a BIG IF

While the exact details and timing of warming are subject to unpredictable decadal (semi-decadal) climate variability (e.g., ENSO, PDO, AMOC), this statement is largely true.

"More cloud cover (which traps heat)" is a gross over simplification regarding the role of clouds as a tuning knob for Earth's climate. While it is true that clouds can act as a blanket and trap more heat, they also serve to reflect sunlight (see the prior sentence regarding the albedo effect).

Which cloud effect ultimately wins out has to do with the optical thickness of the cloud (how reflective it is) and (as a rough approximation), the cloud height. As a quick rule: Higher clouds will act better as a blanket since they are both colder (and therefore radiate less energy to space) and typically optically thin. Conversely, lower clouds act more as a reflector since they are warmer and optically thick.

The IPCC report does generally show a net positive cloud feedback, indicating global cloud feedbacks will lead to additional warming, but cloud feedbacks are extremely complicated and highly uncertain.

My expertise is not in exoplanetary climate, but it is not a definitively accepted "fact" that Venus was once habitable. There is still considerable debate regarding the past habitability of Venus (see links below). Therefore, this statement (which appears to imply that Venus's climate trajectory is foreshadowing for Earth's) comes off way too strong.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL069790/full

and: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0032063311001371?via%3Dihub

There is MUCH uncertainty with regards to how extreme weather events may change in response to global climate change, and there are lively debates within the climate community about this topic. However, there is substantial evidence that extreme events are likely to increase (e.g., [O'Gorman and Schneider 2009] (http://www.pnas.org/content/106/35/14773.short)).

The vague reference to "Meteorological Science" is a strong indication that this statement has no basis in fact.

Comparing the global temperature beginning at 1997 is a common trope used by some to discredit climate science. It is an intentional cherry picking of an anomalously warm year (big El Nino) to serve as the starting point. To convince yourself, start the trend at 1998, and you'll get a much different answer.