Abstract
In recent years, numerous studies have investigated the relationship of extreme precipitation intensities with temperature derived from a binning method using present‐day weather data. The aim of this approach is that these dependencies, or so‐called apparent scaling rates, provide insights on how precipitation extremes could evolve in the future climate. In a recent paper, Bao et al. showed that there is a large discrepancy between the present‐day apparent scaling rates—showing a negative dependency of daily rainfall extremes on temperature for Darwin—and the climate change response showing a substantial increase in daily rainfall extremes. Their results provide compelling evidence that it may not be straightforward to predict the climate change response from the temperature scaling. We agree with this statement, but disagree with the physical explanation put forward in that study and think that moisture limitations are the most likely cause. Therefore, we advocate the use of dew point temperatures in scaling studies as a much more direct proxy of the absolute humidity of the air in which precipitation extremes develop, which we think is physically more consistent with the underlying mechanism causing the increase in precipitation extremes with global warming.