On Monday, The Guardian published an article claiming that climate
change is to blame for extreme weather – it is false and based on flawed
“attribution studies” that lack rigorous peer review.
Attribution
studies use climate models to simulate extreme weather events, but
these models often reflect overheated worst-case scenarios rather than
actual observations.
Empirical data does not support claims of
worsening severe weather, with long-term trends for many extreme weather
events remaining stable or declining, contradicting the narrative
presented by The Guardian and other media outlets.
On Monday 18 November, The Guardian published an “explainer” piece titled ‘How do we know that the climate crisis is to blame for extreme weather?’
This is false. Actual data on extreme weather does not support their
claim, and the claim is mostly based on flawed “attribution studies.”
The
narrative that severe weather events are worsening due to climate
change has become a mainstay in today’s media. However, a closer look at
the data and the science behind these claims often reveals
inconsistencies that should give us pause. Attribution studies, which
are widely used to link specific extreme weather events to climate
change, frequently lack rigorous peer review and are published hastily
to garner headlines, raising significant concerns about their
reliability.
Attribution studies work by using climate models to
simulate two different worlds: one influenced by human-caused climate
change and another without it. These models then assess the likelihood
of extreme weather events in each world. Yet the validity of such
studies is only as good as the models and assumptions underpinning them.
This methodology is prone to overestimating risks because climate
models are often reflecting overheated worst-case scenarios rather than actual observations.
Moreover, these studies are often published without proper peer review. Climate Realism has documented
how media outlets run stories based on these model-driven studies,
ignoring real-world data that often contradicts the alarming
conclusions. For example, articles frequently cite reports that
heatwaves, floods, or hurricanes are “worsening” without disclosing that
these claims rely on theoretical simulations rather than measured
evidence....<<<Read More>>>...