• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

Climate Expert: Extreme Weather Hype Exposed As Real Data Undercuts Attribution Industry

Inside World Weather Attribution - Weather Attribution Alchemy, Part 6

by Roger Pielke Jr
April 07, 2025, 7:09 AM
in Extreme Weather, Lawfare, Media, News and Opinion, Science
Reading Time: 5 mins read
A A
1

Today’s post is Part 6 in the THB series, Weather Attribution Alchemy.

Last month, climate scientist Kate Marvel of NASA shared “something I have really struggled with” about extreme event attribution. [emphasis, links added]

She was speaking as an invited expert in a public information-gathering session of the U.S. National Academy committee1 on extreme event attribution.

Marvel, who also served at the lead author on the chapter on “Climate Trends” in the 2023 U.S. National Climate Assessment,2 explained to the committee that her struggle resulted from the seemingly contradictory findings of (a) the IPCC — which does not detect long-term trends in most metrics of extreme weather, and (b) claims made of extreme event attribution — which seem to find large changes in just about every type of extreme weather:

There’s not [in the IPCC] a lot of “we have a really robust attribution of these long-term trends to human activities,” and that might seem to fly in the face of, “OK well this heat wave is X% more likely or severe or whatever due to human activities.” That’s something I have really struggled to bridge when I’m talking to the public.3

Marvel’s struggle is real.

As I have documented extensively here at THB, the findings of the IPCC on detection and attribution are indeed at odds with the headline-generating pronouncements of the extreme event attribution community.

Reconciling the differences between the two does not, however, require a struggle.

The IPCC has for decades played things (mostly) straight in assessing the peer-reviewed literature on detection and attribution associated with extreme weather events.

In contrast, extreme event attribution is alchemy conjured up largely outside the peer-reviewed literature and promoted via press releases.

Today’s post pulls back the curtain on World Weather Attribution (WWA), which is surely one of the most successful marketing campaigns in the history of climate advocacy.

I call it a marketing campaign based on how they describe their goals:

  • “[I]ncreasing the ‘immediacy’ of climate change, thereby increasing support for mitigation”
  • “Unlike every other branch of climate science or science in general, event attribution was actually originally suggested with the courts in mind.”

WWA has found considerable traction despite its disdain for peer review — its press releases generate headlines around the world, show up in legal filings, and are even widely cited in the peer-reviewed literature.

WWA is also central to the current National Academy of Sciences/Bezos Earth Fund extreme event attribution study, which has the same funder as WWA and membership on the committee itself.

If you read the first five parts of this THB series on Weather Attribution Alchemy, you’ll quickly learn that my concern is not to quibble about the small methodological details of extreme event attribution.

Instead, my critique is that extreme event attribution is pseudoscience, seemingly created to undermine the scientifically robust detection and attribution framework of the IPCC.

Despite its public relations successes, few know what the WWA actually does and how it does it in linking seemingly every notable weather event to climate change (and as THB readers know, climate change is not a cause).

This is the first of two posts describing the methods of WWA and how those methods are used to generate eye-popping results that make headlines around the world.

The approach used by World Weather Attribution to identify the “effect of global warming on recent extreme events” has, by their accounting, eight steps.

The first is to identify an event that has just happened with some sort of notable impact.

The second step involves identifying a specific variable to characterize the event and on which to center the analysis — such as daily high temperatures over 40°C or maximum five-day rainfall each year.

The third step is crucial and the focus of this post:

The next step is to analyse the observations to establish the return time of the event and how this has changed. This information is also needed to evaluate and bias-correct the climate models later on, so in our methodology the availability of sufficient observations is a requirement to be able to do an attribution study.

Both sentences here are important. The observational time series serves two purposes: (1) establishing how the extreme event has changed (i.e., establishing a trend) and (2) serving as a filter to select which model runs are deemed relevant to making attribution claims.4

How long a time series is required to adequately determine the return time of the event? WWA explains that,

A long time series is needed that includes the event but goes back at least 50 years and preferably more than 100 years.

The statistics of the observational time series are assumed to be characterized by an extreme value distribution (and it appears that the generalized extreme value (GEV) function is typically preferred in WWA studies).

If you are interested in a fantastic short (~7 minute) tutorial on GEV, click on the video below:

WWA makes two further assumptions that are fundamental to their methodology and their results:

  • “[T]he distribution [of historical observations] only shifts or scales with changes in smoothed global mean surface temperature (GMST) and does not change shape”

This means that the distribution of the relevant variable is assumed to be stationary (unchanging) except for the influence of changes in the global mean surface temperature.

There are three huge problems with this assumption.


The Honest Broker is written by climate expert Roger Pielke Jr and is reader-supported. If you value what you have read here, please consider subscribing and supporting the work that goes into it.

Read rest at The Honest Broker

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…

Popular Posts

News

Scientific Bombshell Undermines The Climate Doom Narrative

Oct 23, 2024
Electric Vehicles (EVs)

The ‘Green’ Scam Of The Century: How ‘Renewables’ Increase Fossil Fuel Demands

Oct 23, 2024
News and Opinion

Antarctica Is Colder, Icier Today Than At Any Time In 5,000 Years

Apr 15, 2024

Comments 1

  1. Spurwing Plover says:
    7 months ago

    The truth is coming out about this whole Global Warming/Climate Change Scam of the UN/WEF/CFR Scam

Stay Connected On Social Media

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Recent Posts

  • EPA headquartersIf Govt Shutdown Continues, EPA Eyes Agency Furloughs And Climate Funding Cuts
    Oct 30, 2025
    With agency employees already furloughed and billions in climate-focused grants at risk, EPA head Lee Zeldin warns the agency could face even deeper cuts. […]
  • Hurricane MelissaSorry, AP: Hurricane Melissa’s Strength Isn’t Proof Of Climate Change
    Oct 30, 2025
    The AP attributes Melissa’s rapid intensification to climate change, ignoring long-term hurricane data and natural variability […]
  • coral reef clown fishNew Study Finds Great Barrier Reef Coral Cover At Its Highest Since 1985
    Oct 30, 2025
    New study finds Great Barrier Reef coral cover at its highest cover since 1985, with no long-term decline despite past bleaching events. […]
  • Earth spacePhysician: Adaptation, Not Alarmism, Is The Most Effective Climate Solution
    Oct 30, 2025
    An Australian physician says human ingenuity and adaptation—not alarmism—offer the most effective path to climate resilience. […]
  • cnn harry eatonCNN Data Analyst Admits Most Voters Simply Don’t Care About Climate Change
    Oct 29, 2025
    Most Americans remain unconcerned about climate change despite decades of alarmism, CNN’s Harry Enten admits. […]
  • COP30 BrazilAs COP30 Looms, Trump Challenges Unhinged ‘Climate Crisis’ Narrative
    Oct 29, 2025
    Trump slams the climate hoax, questions the green new scam and so-called climate crisis, and defends U.S. fossil fuels ahead of COP30. […]
  • Bill GatesBill Gates Retreats From Climate Doom, Tells Activists To Focus On Urgent ‘Social Issues’
    Oct 29, 2025
    Bill Gates, once a climate alarmist, softens his doomsday stance and urges activists to focus on more immediate issues like welfare and poverty. […]
  • Trump signs an executive action to support the coal industry as Lee Zeldin looks on.China Files Comments Urging EPA To Keep Biden-Era Power Plant Rules
    Oct 29, 2025
    China’s Federal Register comments backing Biden-era EPA rules highlight Beijing’s interest in shaping U.S. energy policy, Zeldin says. […]
  • Exxon gas stationExxonMobil Sues California Over Forced Speech, Climate Reporting Laws
    Oct 28, 2025
    ExxonMobil says California’s disclosure and reporting laws violate its free speech by forcing the company to accept the state’s view on climate change. […]
  • cop30‘UN COP FLOP’: Most Countries Will Miss Climate Targets Ahead Of Major Summit
    Oct 28, 2025
    Most countries are set to miss their climate pledges as the UN COP30 summit nears, highlighting global inaction despite international commitments. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Subscribe to receive a digest of daily stories, or get emailed once they're published. Check your Junk/Spam folder for a verification email.

Submit a tip

Please enter your email, so we know you're human.

Books You May Like

exposing great lie

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

© Portions copyright Climate Change Dispatch

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2025 Climate Change Dispatch

 
Share via
  • Facebook
  • Like
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky
Share via
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky