{"id":398682,"date":"2025-08-29T11:00:22","date_gmt":"2025-08-29T09:00:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=398682"},"modified":"2025-08-29T11:00:24","modified_gmt":"2025-08-29T09:00:24","slug":"beware-claims-attributing-extreme-events-to-hydrocarbons","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=398682","title":{"rendered":"Beware Claims Attributing Extreme Events to\u00a0Hydrocarbons"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Science Matters<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Ron Clutz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A
RIP. You did good science and for that we are grateful.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Roger Pielke Jr. alerts us to a dangerous development in the IPCC effort claiming loss and damage from using hydrocarbons.  His blog article is A Takeover of the IPCC.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The IPCC\u2019s longstanding framework for detection and attribution looks DOA in AR7<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pielke: <\/strong> The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just released the names of its authors<\/a> for its seventh assessment report (AR7). The author list for its Chapter 3<\/strong> \u2014 Changes in regional climate and extremes, and their causes \u2014 suggests<\/strong> strongly that the IPCC will be shifting<\/strong> from its longstanding focus on detection and attribution (D&A) of extreme events to a focus on \u201cextreme event attribution\u201d (EEA).<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The IPCC AR6 was decidedly lukewarm to freezing cold<\/a> on the notion of EEA, and emphasized the traditional D&A framework. Those days may now be over.  World Weather Attribution (WWA) co-founder Frederika Otto has been put in charge<\/strong> of the chapter, along with another academic who focuses on extreme event attribution.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pielke has a series of articles taking exception to EEA methods and claims.  This post is a synopsis of work by Patrick Brown on the same issue, which is likely to be featured by climatists in the days and months ahead.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Graphic<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

How Climate Attribution Studies Become Devious and Untrustworthy<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Patrick Brown raises the question Do Climate Attribution Studies Tell the Full Story?<\/strong><\/a> Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images, his analysis concluding thusly:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How a cascade of selection effects bias
the collective output of extreme event attribution studies.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Weather and climate extremes<\/strong>\u2014such as high temperatures, floods, droughts, tropical cyclones, extratropical cyclones, and severe thunderstorms\u2014have always threatened<\/a> both human and natural systems. Given their significant impacts, there is considerable interest in how human-caused climate change influences these extremes. This is the focus of the relatively new discipline of Extreme Event Attribution (EEA).<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Over the past couple of decades, there has been an explosion in EEA studies<\/strong> focusing on (or, \u201ctriggered by\u201d) some prior notable weather or climate extreme. Non-peer-reviewed reports from World Weather Attribution<\/a> (e.g., here<\/a>, here<\/a>, and here<\/a>) represent some of the most notable examples of these kinds of analyses, and many similar studies also populate the peer-reviewed literature. The Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society\u2019s \u201cExplaining Extreme Events From a Climate Perspective<\/a>\u201d annual series compiles such studies, as does the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law<\/a>, and they are also synthesized in reports like those from the IPCC (IPCC WG1 AR6 Chapter 11.2.3<\/a>) and the United States National Climate Assessment<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The collective output of these kinds of studies certainly gives the impression that human-caused climate change is drastically changing<\/strong> the frequency and intensity of all kinds of weather extremes.<\/strong> Indeed, Carbon Brief recently published an extensive summary<\/a> of the science of EEA studies, which begins with the proclamation, \u201cAs global temperatures rise, extreme weather events are becoming more intense and more frequent all around the world.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, these numbers cannot be taken as<\/strong> an accurate<\/strong> quantification of the influence of climate change on extreme weather because they are heavily influenced by a cascade of selection biases<\/strong> originating from the physical climate system, as well as researcher and media incentives. Identifying and understanding these biases is a prerequisite for properly interpreting the collective output of EEA studies and, thus, what implications they hold for general scientific understanding, as well as political and legal questions.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Map<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The large apparent discrepancy between the size of the influence of human-caused climate change on extreme weather reported in EEA studies (like those compiled by Carbon Brief) compared to more comprehensive systematic analyses (like those compiled by the IPCC) can, in large part, be attributed to the many layers of Selection Biases<\/a> <\/strong>that influence the EEA literature\u2019s collective output.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Selection Bias<\/strong> is a broad term that refers to any bias that arises from a process that selects data for analysis in a way that fails to ensure that data is representative<\/strong> of the broader population that the study wishes to describe.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Selection biases in the context of EEA studies<\/strong> include those associated with the physical climate system itself<\/strong>, those concerning proclivities and incentives facing researchers\/journals<\/strong>, and those concerning the proclivities and incentives facing the media.<\/strong> They include<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Occurrence Bias<\/a><\/strong> is a bias introduced by the physical climate system. Since EEA studies tend to be triggered by extreme events that have actually occurred, there is reason to believe that these studies will disproportionately sample events that are more likely than average to be exacerbated by climate change because the events occurred in the first place<\/strong>. Essentially, extreme events that are more likely to occur under climate change\u2014and thus more likely to be observed\u2014are going to be overrepresented in EEA studies, and extreme events that are less likely to occur under climate change\u2014and thus less likely to be observed\u2014are going to be underrepresented in EEA studies.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The map below illustrates this phenomenon<\/strong>. It shows changes in the magnitude of extreme drought under climate change. Specifically, it shows the fractional change in the intensity of once-per-50-year droughts (as quantified by monthly soil moisture) between a preindustrial and 21st-century run (SSP2-4.5 emissions) of the highly-regarded NCAR CESM2 Climate Model<\/a>.<\/strong> Blue areas<\/strong> represent locations where the model simulates that extreme droughts become less frequent and intense<\/strong> with enhanced greenhouse gas concentrations, and red areas<\/strong> represent locations where the model simulates<\/strong> that extreme droughts become more frequent and intense<\/strong> with enhanced greenhouse gas concentrations. It is notable that overall<\/strong>, this model simulates<\/strong> that warming <\/sub>decreases the frequency and intensity of extreme drought in more locations than it increases it<\/strong> (consistent with soil moistening under warming simulated by other models<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"World<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Now, here\u2019s the kicker: The black dots show locations where once-per-50-year droughts actually occurred <\/strong>in the 21st-century simulation and thus represent events that would plausibly trigger EEA studies.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What do you notice about where the dots are compared to where the red is? That\u2019s right; the simulated EEA studies overwhelmingly sample areas where droughts are getting more intense and more frequent<\/strong> by the very nature that those are the types of droughts that are more likely to occur in the warming climate. The result is that the EEA sample is majorly biased: warming decreased the intensity<\/strong> of once-per-50-year droughts by about 1% overall<\/strong>, but it increased their intensity within the EEA sample by 18%!<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, if you just relied on the EEA sample, you would come away with an
incorrect impression not only on the magnitude of change in extreme droughts
but also on the sign of the direction of change!<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Choice Bias<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0arises\u00a0when researchers use prior knowledge to choose events for EEA studies<\/strong>\u00a0that are more likely to have been made more severe by climate change. A clear\u00a0example of Choice Bias<\/strong>\u00a0pervading the\u00a0Carbon Brief database<\/a>\u00a0is there have been\u00a03.6 times more studies on extreme heat than there have been on extreme winter weather<\/strong>\u00a0(205 vs. 57).\u00a0Another example<\/strong>\u00a0would be the\u00a0dearth of EEA studies on extratropical cyclones<\/strong>\u00a0(the kinds of low-pressure systems with cold and warm fronts that are responsible for most of the dramatic weather outside of the tropics). The IPCC\u00a0states that<\/a>\u00a0the number of extratropical cyclones associated with intense surface wind speeds is expected to decrease strongly in the Northern Hemisphere with warming. Yet, it is relatively rare for EEA attribution studies to be done on these types of systems, which\u00a0results in an exclusion of this good news from the EEA literature.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Bar<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Publication Bias<\/a><\/strong> could be playing a role, too, where researchers are more likely to submit, and journals are likely to publish<\/strong><\/a> studies that report significant effects<\/strong> on salient events compared to studies that find null effects.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A
From Clark et al., 2023<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Finally, the\u00a0climate reporting media<\/strong>\u00a0ecosystem is characterized by actors\u00a0whose\u00a0explicit mission is to raise awareness of the negative impacts of climate change<\/strong><\/a>,<\/strong>\u00a0and thus, there will be a natural\u00a0Media Coverage Bias<\/strong>\u00a0with a tendency to selectively highlight EEA studies where climate change is found to be a larger driver than EEA studies that do not reach such a conclusion. These selection biases are apparent at the aggregate level, but there is also strong evidence of their presence in individual studies.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\""A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

A more\u00a0recent specific example<\/strong>\u00a0suggestive of many of these dynamics is a study,\u00a0Gilford et al. (2024)<\/a>, titled\u00a0\u201cHuman-caused ocean warming has intensified recent hurricanes\u201d.<\/strong>\u00a0This study was conducted by three researchers at\u00a0Climate Central<\/a>, which summarizes the study\u2019s findings with the following infographic:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Infographic
From Climate Central press release on Gilford et al. (2024).<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Essentially, they claim<\/strong> that climate change is enhancing the intensity of all hurricanes and that the enhancement is quite large: Storms today are calculated to be an entire Category<\/a> stronger than they would have been in a preindustrial climate.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a huge effect, and thus, if it were real,<\/strong> it is reasonable to expect to see clear long-term trends in metrics of tropical cyclone (hurricane) intensity<\/strong> like the accumulated number of major (Category 3+) hurricane days or the accumulated cyclone energy from all tropical cyclones (which is proportional to the square of hurricane windspeed accumulated over their lifetimes). However, any long-term trends in such metrics are subtle at best, both globally and over the North Atlantic.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Line
From Colorado State University Department of Atmospheric Science Tropical Meteorology Project.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

So, this is a microcosm of the aforementioned apparent discrepancy between more broad quantifications of changes in extremes and their associated EEA counterparts, and again, I\u2019d argue there are\u00a0several selection biases at play affecting the production and dissemination of the EEA study.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Bar<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s start with Choice Bias on methodology.<\/strong> Human-caused warming changes the environment in some ways that work to enhance hurricanes and in other ways that diminish them<\/a>. The main way that hurricanes are enhanced<\/strong> is via the increase in sea surface temperatures<\/strong> (which provides the fundamental fuel for hurricanes), and the main way that hurricanes are diminished<\/strong> is via changes in atmospheric wind shear and humidity<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The net result of these countervailing factors pulling in opposite directions<\/strong> is that we expect fewer hurricanes overall, but when hurricanes are able to form, they can be stronger than they would otherwise<\/a>. These factors, though, are small relative to natural random variability,<\/strong> and thus, they are difficult to detect in observations<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the Climate Central researchers made the methodological choice
to largely exclude the influence of factors that diminish
hurricane development from the study.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are these Choice Biases in event type and methodology an accident?<\/strong> There are many reasons to believe they are not<\/strong>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The research paper itself spells out that the motivation of the study<\/strong> is to \u201cconnect the dots\u201d between climate change and hurricanes because \u201clandfalling hurricanes with high intensities\u2014can act as \u2018focusing events\u2019 that draw public attention\u201d<\/strong> and that \u201cIncreased attention during and in wake of storms creates opportunities for public and private discourse around climate and disaster preparedness.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Cartoon<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Then, there is the\u00a0extensive media coverage of this study<\/strong>. It was picked up by\u00a0134 news outlets<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0ranked in the 99.95th percentile<\/a>\u00a0of research articles (across all journals) of similar age in terms of online attention. Further, it was\u00a0immediately incorporated into\u00a0seven\u00a0Wikipedia articles<\/a>\u00a0(likely having high leverage on AI queries, which would make its findings indistinguishable from scientific \u201cfact\u201d). This is affected by the aforementioned Media Coverage Bias, but it is also undoubtedly directly influenced by the efforts of Climate Central, which is\u00a0explicitly an advocacy organization<\/a>\u00a0whose\u00a0self-described specialty<\/a>\u00a0is media placement and dissemination.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The above sheds light on the reasons for certain choice biases in a particular study, but there is plenty of evidence that these selection biases are pervasive in the EEA field<\/a>. After all, Dr. Myles Allen essentially founded the field with the motivation of answering the question, \u201cWill it ever be possible to sue anyone for damaging the climate?<\/a>\u201d.<\/strong> This same motivation seems to animate many of the most high-profile scientists in the field today, like Allen\u2019s protege, Dr. Friederike Otto (co-founder and leader of World Weather Attribution<\/a>). She and her organization are frequently cited as bringing the necessary intellectual authority<\/a> to credibly sue fossil fuel companies. She states the motivation of her work explicitly<\/a>:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAttributing extreme weather events to climate change, as I do
through my work as a climatologist, means we can hold
countries and companies to account for their inaction.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Given the explicitly stated motivation<\/strong> of those in the EEA field, it is quite reasonable to suppose that there are major selection biases at play,<\/strong> and thus, it is not at all surprising that the collective output of the EEA field would look so different from more broad comprehensive assessments.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just released the names of its authors for its seventh assessment report (AR7). The author list for its Chapter 3 \u2014 Changes in regional climate and extremes, and their causes \u2014 suggests strongly that the IPCC will be shifting from its longstanding focus on detection and attribution (D&A) of extreme events to a focus on \u201cextreme event attribution\u201d (EEA).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":398719,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"Explore the shifting landscape of climate event attribution as the IPCC moves towards extreme event focus, challenging established norms.","jetpack_seo_html_title":"Critical Insights on IPCC's Shift in Climate Event Attribution","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691834120,691818056,691820922,691837622,691822982,691834206],"class_list":{"0":"post-398682","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-central-cc","9":"tag-climate-change","10":"tag-intergovernmental-panel-on-climate-change-ipcc","11":"tag-seventh-assessment-report-ar7","12":"tag-weather-and-climate-extremes","13":"tag-world-weather-attribution-wwa","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMftlemxtqUzUpTqSFddzeJWDW3keQOeviRYVZp6kR0_N5EBF5gUWScpL1rcnrzL8llPbZLH_v_0EQCJsm5RCBaK4MLIZ9d1KNnLmW_UlTRRr8aIShnwpZX-Vmdvog_17wn8BQPVmelV9Ey2fK_A7IGIAhTHQ.jpeg?fit=1280%2C1280&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1FIm","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":397419,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=397419","url_meta":{"origin":398682,"position":0},"title":"A Takeover of the IPCC","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"24\/08\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just released the\u00a0names of its authors\u00a0for its seventh assessment report (AR7). The author list for its Chapter 3 \u2014\u00a0Changes in regional climate and extremes, and their causes\u00a0\u2014 suggests strongly that the IPCC will be shifting from its longstanding focus on detection and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=extreme-event-attribution-eea-2"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQN8E73mBIeJ79BE64oOwpgHrEoSyrULkNvH71IBO_mZ-qC9TT56xklCfqmbKBgyyUuH0SiFQnL0RA97mkkP-gt4iwKb3cGby9hHl1IrYhMenazzDXdlq4RY91HfC4fLWJZVAxkCgmGcMTsLCwfKPZDwSEAaCA-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":435576,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=435576","url_meta":{"origin":398682,"position":1},"title":"X-Weather Attributions by Pseudo-Scientists","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"30\/03\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Extreme weather attribution studies are based on flawed logic and generate misleading headlines, according to a new briefing paper from The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQM_gzDidGgXCbQCo_8tDdJHyE1HQhiIr1ytBFUhspq-Z2jmvLhvYECdxo60tf7IwAYvX604HbjEjj-twRN2wPjwBKGqsgy8S8iY68TUucfbQyEhUO3jm08QWxvF_eSWRF-wXPYIS33vnd_K867MXsRj8Swh1w.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQM_gzDidGgXCbQCo_8tDdJHyE1HQhiIr1ytBFUhspq-Z2jmvLhvYECdxo60tf7IwAYvX604HbjEjj-twRN2wPjwBKGqsgy8S8iY68TUucfbQyEhUO3jm08QWxvF_eSWRF-wXPYIS33vnd_K867MXsRj8Swh1w.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQM_gzDidGgXCbQCo_8tDdJHyE1HQhiIr1ytBFUhspq-Z2jmvLhvYECdxo60tf7IwAYvX604HbjEjj-twRN2wPjwBKGqsgy8S8iY68TUucfbQyEhUO3jm08QWxvF_eSWRF-wXPYIS33vnd_K867MXsRj8Swh1w.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQM_gzDidGgXCbQCo_8tDdJHyE1HQhiIr1ytBFUhspq-Z2jmvLhvYECdxo60tf7IwAYvX604HbjEjj-twRN2wPjwBKGqsgy8S8iY68TUucfbQyEhUO3jm08QWxvF_eSWRF-wXPYIS33vnd_K867MXsRj8Swh1w.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQM_gzDidGgXCbQCo_8tDdJHyE1HQhiIr1ytBFUhspq-Z2jmvLhvYECdxo60tf7IwAYvX604HbjEjj-twRN2wPjwBKGqsgy8S8iY68TUucfbQyEhUO3jm08QWxvF_eSWRF-wXPYIS33vnd_K867MXsRj8Swh1w.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":419411,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=419411","url_meta":{"origin":398682,"position":2},"title":"No, Yale Climate Connections, Dramatic Photos Don\u2019t Prove Climate Change Effects","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/01\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The recent article in Yale Climate Connections, \u201cSix photos show how climate change shaped our world in 2025,\u201d by Samantha Harrington, presents a photo-driven narrative asserting that wildfires, floods, heat waves, hurricanes, and droughts in 2025 were \u201cmade more devastating and deadly by climate change.\u201d This is outright false. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Central (CC)\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Central (CC)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-central-cc"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEJ8xQofCYRvfhGcC6Mcv2PtJISsQ6u-X1L3PyzD5dge-wHNEdkKhnVpmlhU0Vg1YLGf4fEbIfYbJUqED32sswO4vXHrSOoJWYaZX0wXmXSx70epLQsHB61TJSa5qb.jpeg?fit=1000%2C608&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEJ8xQofCYRvfhGcC6Mcv2PtJISsQ6u-X1L3PyzD5dge-wHNEdkKhnVpmlhU0Vg1YLGf4fEbIfYbJUqED32sswO4vXHrSOoJWYaZX0wXmXSx70epLQsHB61TJSa5qb.jpeg?fit=1000%2C608&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEJ8xQofCYRvfhGcC6Mcv2PtJISsQ6u-X1L3PyzD5dge-wHNEdkKhnVpmlhU0Vg1YLGf4fEbIfYbJUqED32sswO4vXHrSOoJWYaZX0wXmXSx70epLQsHB61TJSa5qb.jpeg?fit=1000%2C608&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEJ8xQofCYRvfhGcC6Mcv2PtJISsQ6u-X1L3PyzD5dge-wHNEdkKhnVpmlhU0Vg1YLGf4fEbIfYbJUqED32sswO4vXHrSOoJWYaZX0wXmXSx70epLQsHB61TJSa5qb.jpeg?fit=1000%2C608&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":354504,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=354504","url_meta":{"origin":398682,"position":3},"title":"IPCC U-Turn as it Prepares to Start Blaming Humans for Bad Weather","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"15\/12\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Fears are growing that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) could water down or even ditch its current finding that almost all types of extreme weather events have little or no sign of past human involvement, or any going forward to 2100.","rel":"","context":"In \"Attribution studies\"","block_context":{"text":"Attribution studies","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=attribution-studies"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-13-182901.jpeg?fit=1200%2C648&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-13-182901.jpeg?fit=1200%2C648&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-13-182901.jpeg?fit=1200%2C648&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-13-182901.jpeg?fit=1200%2C648&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-13-182901.jpeg?fit=1200%2C648&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":397652,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=397652","url_meta":{"origin":398682,"position":4},"title":"Pielke Jr. \u2013A Takeover of the IPCC","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"25\/08\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Roger Pielke Jr.\u2019s\u00a0\u201cA Takeover of the IPCC\u201d\u00a0offers a timely post-mortem on what\u2019s left of scientific rigor in the world\u2019s most influential climate assessment body, of which Pielke Jr. has long been a supporter. The article chronicles not just a change in personnel at the IPCC, but a seismic shift in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cExtreme event attribution\u201d (EEA)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=extreme-event-attribution-eea-2"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQMj8yHR8Be8RHSFGKLFy_bflKmAnzt8LM1X7piKEL-2ElU5jZObEOU6HGGBGI1E2OSwUBxyA7Arc4WJhfFb9P6XGZu9UVClDsD0gxlikkhHBUYvuFviW7TVKMhjRH4de4-fyUz9zWF8pT6BR0uNlanT4P2Wpg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":408592,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=408592","url_meta":{"origin":398682,"position":5},"title":"Bunk from the Brink","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/10\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Over at\u00a0The Climate Brink, Andrew Dessler and Zeke Hausfather have taken on the role of self-appointed sheriffs of climate science, at times in highly partisan and personal terms. Recently, Dessler, along with another scientist, Robert Kopp, and dozens of others, prepared a lengthy response to the Department of Energy\u2019s Climate\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate models\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate models","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-models"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQN5oo6H0pzqoqjDivkTNeqzqaMiK1JN4Wv7q8P2j3tFyznYHVOoyyqNNqWvXVDQoPvSCwU5IHyK30LzgQiCly8PHsALomMd0Niou0VRiL0824Ep-GY-zT9toMRhEOmGWanPBNrHEddBpV7sU-2g0hbf3PQiw.png?fit=675%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQN5oo6H0pzqoqjDivkTNeqzqaMiK1JN4Wv7q8P2j3tFyznYHVOoyyqNNqWvXVDQoPvSCwU5IHyK30LzgQiCly8PHsALomMd0Niou0VRiL0824Ep-GY-zT9toMRhEOmGWanPBNrHEddBpV7sU-2g0hbf3PQiw.png?fit=675%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/AQN5oo6H0pzqoqjDivkTNeqzqaMiK1JN4Wv7q8P2j3tFyznYHVOoyyqNNqWvXVDQoPvSCwU5IHyK30LzgQiCly8PHsALomMd0Niou0VRiL0824Ep-GY-zT9toMRhEOmGWanPBNrHEddBpV7sU-2g0hbf3PQiw.png?fit=675%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/398682","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=398682"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/398682\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":398721,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/398682\/revisions\/398721"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/398719"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=398682"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=398682"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=398682"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}