Meet the Climate Change Rapid Reaction World Weather Attribution Unit

Essay by Eric Worrall

Climate scientists have acted to ensure the world receives their narrative as quickly as possible, whenever a severe weather event strikes.

‘I am an optimistic person’: the scientist who studies climate catastrophes

Friederike Otto, a member of the world’s only rapid reaction force of climate scientists, on looking into the apocalypse of extreme weather

Sandra Laville Environment correspondent
Fri 30 Dec 2022 01.30 AEDT

Otto, known as Fredi, and a small team of researchers are the world’s only rapid reaction force of climate scientists. They target extreme weather across the world almost as it happens, reach out to local people on the ground, and carry out deep, rigorous statistical analysis, which is transforming our understanding of how human-caused global heating is affecting the planet and our lives.

Until now, scientists have had to be equivocal about whether a single weather event is linked to global heating. Otto’s work makes the connection between the string of disasters the world is suffering and global heating, much clearer. Her work was recognised internationally in 2021 when she was named one of Time magazine’s 100 most influential people.

The journey from the creation of the World Weather Attribution unit to its current iteration, began with a paper Otto and Oldenborgh wrote on a heatwave in Russia in 2010. It was a classical academic paper, peer reviewed and published long after the event.

This last study drew her up short by the starkness of its findings. “One of the biggest scientific surprises for me this year was the floods in Nigeria because there was such a huge climate change impact,” said Otto. “They were made 80 times more likely as a result of climate change. That makes me think: ‘Oh wow, there is really a lot that we don’t understand in Africa’.”

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/29/i-am-an-optimistic-person-the-scientist-who-studies-climate-catastrophes

Obviously it is critically important to climate science that attribution studies align with news cycles. Otto has been very successful in attracting attention, her World Weather Attribution team made Time Magazine’s top 100 most influential people in 2021.

4.2 24 votes
Article Rating
91 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ben Vorlich
January 1, 2023 10:07 am

I don’t think a rapid reaction unit is required in the UK. Any weather event or any event vaguely related to weather is immediately attributed to to Climate Change, in fact just about everything is connected to a Climate Emergency

davidmhoffer
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 1, 2023 11:48 am

Didn’t you notice? Its now “climate heating”.

At now 80 times more likely to cause flooding, how many flood per year should we expect. 2? 5? No where in the article did I see 80 times “what”.

John Wilson
Reply to  davidmhoffer
January 1, 2023 3:50 pm

She’s just another fact checker type who tells the people what they want to hear without a drot of critical thinking which you just applied to that fantastical claim.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  davidmhoffer
January 2, 2023 7:32 pm

Climate change has had such an impact on our world, the press releases now just seem to write themselves! /sarc

Joao Martins
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 2, 2023 4:59 am

Half a century ago, when I went to England to finish my specialization, I was told by some fellow Britons that “Here we don’t have a climate, we have only weather”. Wisdom lost, as I can see.

Editor
January 1, 2023 10:11 am

This should be a fun thread for comments. I’ll be back.

Regards,
Bob

PS: And as we recall from A Fish Called Wanda, Otto means eight in Italian.

Mr.
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
January 1, 2023 10:19 am

And don’t call him “Stupid”.. . .

Richard Greene
Reply to  Mr.
January 1, 2023 11:53 am

Or Shirley.

John Shewchuk
January 1, 2023 10:13 am

The ambulance chasing profession is expanding.

rah
Reply to  John Shewchuk
January 1, 2023 10:48 am

Yep! They can’t get their projections right, heck they can’t even really forecast the weather accurately more than 3 days out. But they By God, sure know how to show up after the fact and point fingers. They’re like a bunch of 6th graders on the playground.

ClimateBear
Reply to  rah
January 1, 2023 4:27 pm

6th graders? I remember 6th grade and we were a lot more streetwise and savvy at that age (about 11). Try Prep or grade 1 Rah (before they have done a pooh and had their ritilin).

ClimateBear
Reply to  John Shewchuk
January 1, 2023 4:25 pm

Ambulance chasing, coat trailing, street walking, sideshow alley spruiking, media managing ‘science communicators’ is actually a new profession coming out of climate scientophosy.

Scarecrow Repair
January 1, 2023 10:21 am

“deep, rigorous statistical analysis” seems a bit conflicted with “rapid reaction force”.

Scissor
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
January 1, 2023 10:25 am

I’d like to see their rigorous attribution analysis for deconvoluting natural vs human caused effects.

John Shewchuk
Reply to  Scissor
January 1, 2023 10:55 am

They won’t allow it because it would expose their corruption.

Rick C
Reply to  Scissor
January 1, 2023 3:52 pm

They use a very simple model – was it weather? If yes, was it bad? If yes, definitely climate change. If no, still climate change. !00% accuracy assured by all pre-selected peer-reviewers agreement.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
January 1, 2023 12:44 pm

Was it Ross McKittrick who blew up their statistical algorithm? Something about violating the G-M limit on statistical validity?

Decaf
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
January 1, 2023 2:04 pm

But they sound impressive. You weren’t meant to catch the conflict part.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
January 2, 2023 7:33 pm

Yea, I think I strained an eye-roll muscle on that one.

Curious George
January 1, 2023 10:26 am

Superman really exists! Now I can sleep quietly.

Tom Halla
January 1, 2023 10:28 am

Is her “deep, rigorous statistical analysis” a Magic Eight Ball with only one answer, climate change due to greenhouse gasses?

Paul Hurley
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 1, 2023 11:42 am

I think “deep, rigorous statistical analysis” means they’re using a computer model that says what they tell it to say.

ClimateBear
Reply to  Paul Hurley
January 1, 2023 4:34 pm

Their idea of “deep statistical analysis’ equates to 10 seconds of wave buoy data or say 1 hour of tidal data from which CATSTROPHIC SEA LEVEL RISE can be “accurately calculated” by the slope of a ‘line of best fit’.

As an engineer I just cannot wrap my head around the analytical incompetence on display with these bozos. The churnalist parrots I can fathom, they are even bigger groupthinktalk whores than the scientosphists.

ClimateBear
Reply to  ClimateBear
January 1, 2023 4:35 pm

errata:- the correct term is “scientossophists”

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 1, 2023 11:56 am

Why waste money for a Magic Eight Ball?
Everting bad is caused by climate change:
Hot weather, cold weather, cancer and warts.
And climate change will kill your dog!

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Greene
BurlHenry
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 2, 2023 7:16 am

Richard Greene:

Off topic, but needs further consideration.

On an earlier thread you stated “1975-1980 Temperatures up and SO2 up too,NOT down”, citing UAH data.

Between 1975 and 1980 Industrial SO2 aerosol emissions increased by 10 Megatons.

SO2 aerosols (a fine mist of Sulfuric Acid droplets) are reflective,and cool the Earth’s surface by reflecting away the Sun’s rays.

Thus, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any warming to have occurred between 1975 and 1980 (which, was a period when there were fears of the return of a new Ice Age, due to the cold temperatures).

The only possible explanation for your statement that temperatures were up between 1975 and 1980 (apart from your being mistaken) is that the UAH sensors also sense the Sun’s reflected rays as heat, thus giving false information.

In light of the above, all UAH temperature data should be considered to be questionable.

morfu03
January 1, 2023 10:32 am

Apparently, she and her people are too busy bugging people in need to answer R. McKitrick´s paper showing that the current attribution method (used for more than 20 years) is flawed and therefore meaningless.

Her fresh data seems to be identical with that from later insurance claims, which are collected just a bit later and are far less news flashy.

Vultures training children soldiers!

Mr.
January 1, 2023 10:34 am

The point of this whole “attribution” silliness is that there is no point to it all.

I mean, so what if after a random storm, flood, hot spell etc, etc somewhere, some grant-funded pointy-head finagles some numbers on a spreadsheet, and yells “BINGO!” to an always-salivating press pack?

How does this “revelation” help the people impacted by severe weather events?

The climate cult lunacy in some has been turned up to 11.

David Wojick
Reply to  Mr.
January 1, 2023 11:54 am

It will support reparations claims and litigation. These folks stand to make a lot of money. Mind you if AGW actually made a flood 80 times more likely it still did not cause it. A carnival of Courts looms. Law damages based on meaningless numbers.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Mr.
January 1, 2023 11:57 am

Your comment was caused by
Climate Change!

Comment Attribution Team

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Greene
moringa man
January 1, 2023 10:37 am

Imperial College strikes again, yea that’s what we need the lies to get out to the people even faster than they do now and with gusto to boot. What a job to sit with your cell and wait for some news of bad weather and then tell us we are all going to die. Go get another piercing and leave us all alone and safe from your lies

alastairgray29yahoocom
January 1, 2023 10:42 am

Rabid Reaction Force

rah
January 1, 2023 10:46 am

That global climate change sure gets around.

Climate Scam Goes SouthPosted on January 1, 2023 by tonyheller
There is more Arctic sea ice now than there was fifteen years ago when Al Gore won the Nobel Prize and predicted all the ice would be gone in seven years. So climate alarmists have turned their attention south to Antarctica.

Climate Scam Goes South | Real Climate Science

Peta of Newark
January 1, 2023 10:48 am

How old are these people, are they ‘out of diapers’ yet, does their mother know what they’re planning?

No matter, theyre waaaaaay too late to this party, BBC and Met Office have it all mapped out already.

Headline:”Met Office forecasts 2023 will be hotter than 2022
BBC

Last edited 1 month ago by Peta of Newark
strativarius
January 1, 2023 11:12 am

Do the BBC etc really need to be told by Otto et al?

I don’t think they do.

quelgeek
January 1, 2023 11:14 am

“a member of the world’s only rapid reaction force of climate scientists”

Says who?

I suspect the dress-up box is missing a white coat.

It doesnot add up
Reply to  quelgeek
January 1, 2023 1:41 pm

I suppose it is telling us that the Met Office and BBC don’t employ scientists. We certainly know the BBC prefers English 3rd class degrees.

Andy Pattullo
January 1, 2023 11:18 am

Easy to react rapidly when you ignore scientific process. Your conclusions are preformed and arguments already constructed based on invalid models. Never mind that there are no objective trends in adverse weather in the records. Far too many people lack the integrity to resist the lure of media fame and the veneer of saving the planet. This is just one more person who self identifies as a saint while doing the work of profiteers and fraudsters.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
January 2, 2023 7:43 pm

I’m trying to picture this… A Word™ document set up as a form, just fill in the disaster, the location, the date(s) of occurrence, and then for the “…times more likely…” cell she uses all 5 dice from the Yatzee™ set and multiplies the result, rather than adds. She can have a press release ready to go in less than 15 minutes after she gets that phone call. Yea, that’s it, that’s the ticket, suuuuure… No wonder she doesn’t want anyone else to see her laptop.

cognog2
January 1, 2023 11:31 am

Having sold its soul to the Alarmunists some time back all the Media has these days is repetitive knee jerk reactions I suppose, leaving the sane to yawn and the rest to their neurotic misery.

walterr070
January 1, 2023 11:35 am

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-64032458

“Next year the natural and temporary braking effect of La Niña will wane. The full-on gas pedal will invigorate warming over the coming year and continue into the future, along with more severe wet, dry and hot extremes, until policies are in place to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions,” Richard Allan, professor of climate science at University of Reading told BBC News.

So somehow extreme weather disasters and global warming will continue and then just magically stop once net zero is achieved? Do people not realize how absurd that is? It couldn’t be more obvious even to my 19 year old brain that this is just an agenda.

Last edited 1 month ago by walterr070
downunder
Reply to  walterr070
January 1, 2023 8:00 pm

No, not until net zero greenhouse emissions, but until policies are in place.

Richard Greene
January 1, 2023 11:51 am

To me the Eric Worrall byline means “must read”

It seems to me that weather forecasting is good enough so that bad weather can be predicted at least two days in advance.

Shouldn’t the weather attributers start publicizing the coming “Climate Change caused Weather Disaster” two days before it hits a local area?

They act like lazy lima beans now, waiting until after the bad weather hits. Even attribution during the weather event is too late to start their climate change propaganda.

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Greene
Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 1, 2023 10:30 pm

You are right.
If they have it figured out so well why can’t they predict each event in advance?

Steve Case
January 1, 2023 11:52 am

 They … carry out deep, rigorous statistical analysis, which is transforming our understanding of how human-caused global heating is affecting the planet and our lives.
__________________________________________________________

Natural causes? Not part of the agenda: 

PRINCIPLES GOVERNING IPCC WORK 

     The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open
     and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic
     information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of
     human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for
     adaptation and mitigation. IPCC reports should be neutral with respect
     to policy, although they may need to deal objectively with scientific,
     technical and socio-economic factors relevant to the application of
     particular policies.  

David Dibbell
January 1, 2023 11:56 am

“One of the biggest scientific surprises for me this year was the floods in Nigeria because there was such a huge climate change impact,” said Otto. “They were made 80 times more likely as a result of climate change. That makes me think: ‘Oh wow, there is really a lot that we don’t understand in Africa’.”

She actually believes this stuff?

If I were the investigator, and an analysis suggested this 80X increased probability, the first thing I would have to say is, “That can’t be right.”

Decaf
Reply to  David Dibbell
January 1, 2023 2:09 pm

She’s writing for her base, not a thinking public.

David Dibbell
Reply to  Decaf
January 2, 2023 10:08 am

Good point.

Redge
Reply to  David Dibbell
January 2, 2023 1:35 am

I would have been more impressed if she sounded more sciency

“They were made 79.639584 times more likely as a result of climate change.”

Now I’m convinced 

Gunga Din
January 1, 2023 12:27 pm

rapid reaction force of climate scientists
Is that what their calling their PR branch?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Gunga Din
January 2, 2023 6:00 am

They are part of the PR Branch along with the Media.

The Climate Change Rapid Reaction Force comes up with a frightening reaction to a certain weather event and passes this on to the Media who spread it around the world.

The problem for the Rapid Reaction Force is there is no evidence connecting CO2 to any weather event. Insisting there is a connection, without any supporting evidence, is delusional.

The problem for the Public is the Rapid Reaction Force are good climate change liars and they have the megaphone of the mass media to amplify their climate change delusions and spread them all over the world, like they are doing here.

niceguy12345
January 1, 2023 12:38 pm

They just want to date climate change!

pflashgordon
January 1, 2023 12:41 pm

“Oh, wow …” “they were made 80 times more likely …”

Is she an “influencer” on TikTok or YouTube? Attribution “science” should appear alongside all of the Karens, Karma, police chase, and crash videos.

Gunga Din
January 1, 2023 12:44 pm

Our washing machine has different setting that allow us to change the “wash and spin cycle” speeds.
No cycle called “rapid”.
Sounds like these guys just skip the “cleaning” cycle and go straight to the “spin” cycle.
That would leave lots of crud in the message.

pflashgordon
January 1, 2023 12:48 pm

A degree in physics – off to a good start. But Fredi then got her doctorate in philosophy. See her photo – at 40, unmarried and wearing Converse AllStars sneakers. Oh,Wow.

F9A01ECA-AB1F-49A2-9174-73DE2FB6045D.jpeg
pflashgordon
Reply to  pflashgordon
January 1, 2023 12:55 pm

Maybe there is a reason that they are the world’s only rabid reaction attribution force. If there were as many as there are global climate models, nothing would agree and uncertainty would skyrocket. She can no more accurately hind cast than modelers can long-range forecast.

It is easy to be certain when yours is the only opinion.

Scissor
Reply to  pflashgordon
January 1, 2023 1:35 pm

At least her sneakers are green.

pflashgordon
Reply to  Scissor
January 1, 2023 8:41 pm

My high school basketball game shoes were green Converse All Stars high tops. Rules didn’t allow dunking in those days, so I had to just drop the ball over the rim. There also was no three-point arc.

Gunga Din
Reply to  pflashgordon
January 1, 2023 1:53 pm

The philosophy of physics.
Who knew there was such a thing?

Mike
Reply to  pflashgordon
January 1, 2023 4:34 pm

A degree in physics – off to a good start.”
A degree in physics means precisely nothing. The head of the CSIRO has one and he is a complete nut job.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Mike
January 2, 2023 6:07 am

Yes, we need to judge by the content, not the label.

downunder
Reply to  pflashgordon
January 1, 2023 8:04 pm

The sneakers are for rapid reaction

Redge
Reply to  pflashgordon
January 2, 2023 1:38 am

at 40, unmarried and wearing Converse AllStars sneakers

Play the ball not the (wo)man

Coeur de Lion
January 1, 2023 1:08 pm

Another example of desperation. After a bit they will run out of ‘extremes’. And fade away. The globe is not‘heating’.

Scissor
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
January 1, 2023 1:54 pm
It doesnot add up
January 1, 2023 1:36 pm

The Otto cycle:

Suck (in your cheeks)
Squeeze nonsense out of the data
Bang out a press release
Blow it around the compliant media.

One for a JOSH cartoon?

Machnee
January 1, 2023 1:50 pm

The “Attribution” or “Blame Game” has been around for several years now. I saw a few of the “Attributions” in play re the Calgary flood of 2013 where it was compared to one event of something and climate change was blamed. The same female researcher did the blame game thing on Arctic Ocean ice. Somewhere (maybe I have a copy) someone did an article to justify it as a “part of science”. I do not recall if it was in the UN.

Decaf
January 1, 2023 2:06 pm

Twice the punch.

garboard
January 1, 2023 3:24 pm

saying every weather event is the result of co2 explains nothing

Tom Abbott
Reply to  garboard
January 2, 2023 6:14 am

Saying a weather event is the result of CO2 is not supported by the science.

And the Rapid Reaction Force doesn’t have the evidence, either. They are blowing smoke. They live in a world of unsubstantiated assumptions and assertions. Human-caused Climate change started out as speculation and it hasn’t gotten any further since. There is no evidence human-derived CO2, or any CO2, derived from any source, is causing the Earth’s weather to do anything it otherwise would not do.

No evidence. None.

John Wilson
January 1, 2023 3:48 pm

80 times more likely as a result of climate change” how can that ever be quantified?


Mike
Reply to  John Wilson
January 1, 2023 5:00 pm

80 times more likely than what? In the ”Prolonged Siberian heat of 2020 almost impossible without human influence” paper she says they used observation and MODELS to ”estimate” the 2020 heat to be a ”once in 130 years” event in the absence of human influence but then go on to use MODELS to say it is now ”500 times more likely”. Once you start with a presumption that you can model the climate, you can do anything you like.So it’s easy to ”quantify” that if you don’t have to VERIFY it.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Mike
January 2, 2023 6:16 am

Excellent comment, Mike.

Machnee
Reply to  John Wilson
January 2, 2023 9:40 am

I thought it was 81.5 times.

Mike
January 1, 2023 5:22 pm

Otto, known as Fredi, and a small team of researchers are the world’s only rapid reaction force of climate scientists. They target extreme weather across the world almost as it happens, reach out to local people on the ground,….

hand of god.JPG
QODTMWTD
January 1, 2023 5:35 pm

The fact that they use “attribution” in their name instead of “explanation” suggests that they’ve already decided that every event is caused by climate change, or whatever it’s called this week.

Hoyt Clagwell
January 1, 2023 6:53 pm

‘Oh wow, there is really a lot that we don’t understand (in Africa’.)”

This is the key line for me. They say it. They write it. They report it. But it never sinks in. They go on as if they understand everything and expect the rest of the world to believe they know what they are talking about.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Hoyt Clagwell
January 2, 2023 6:19 am

“there really is a lot we don’t know”

That’s the key line for me, too.

There’s a lot more she doesn’t understand, too.

ATheoK
January 1, 2023 7:18 pm

Otto, known as Fredi, and a small team of researchers are the world’s only rapid reaction force of climate scientists. They target extreme weather across the world almost as it happens”

Delusional as well.

John Hultquist
January 1, 2023 7:36 pm

” deep, rigorous statistical analysis”

Yah, right! The schist is deep.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  John Hultquist
January 2, 2023 6:21 am

Yes, deep, rigourous analysis of unsubstantiated assumptions. After they are done, it is still unsubstantiated.

Louis Hunt
January 1, 2023 8:37 pm

“One of the biggest scientific surprises for me this year was the floods in Nigeria… They were made 80 times more likely as a result of climate change.”

How could the floods be such a big surprise to Otto if she knew they were 80 times more likely to happen? It doesn’t add up. I’d like to see the charts that show how floods in Africa are occurring 80 times more often than they used to. But why are floods only 80 times more likely to happen in Africa? What about the rest of the world? Why would climate change single out just one area of the globe? Has Nigeria been particularly naughty lately?

Pat from Kerbob
January 1, 2023 10:25 pm

Strange the titles they come up with for the new groupings of Lysenkoists.

Mike Maguire
January 1, 2023 11:46 pm

Mainstream science has long ago abandoned the authentic scientific method.

The world, including the science world today revolves around manufactured realities.

Just make up the reality that you want people to believe in…………that most people WANT TO believe in (which is why very few people fact check any of the climate DISinformation).

Create the convincing sounding fake facts/false narratives which gets repeated so many times that people accept it as the new Climate Religion.

We’re living in a climate optimum for life right now. Not in spite of CO2 but because of this beneficial gas that’s greening up the planet and causing the slight, mostly beneficial warming and best weather/climate in the past 1,000 years……..since the last time that it was this warm (Medieval Warm Period).

Screenshot 2023-01-02 at 01-29-25 climate-and-non-climate-deaths.png (WEBP Image 682 × 648 pixels) — Scaled (83%).png
Rod Evans
January 2, 2023 3:41 am

‘Thunderbergs’ are go!
Dedicated to saving victims from imaginary climate issues, the team equipped with the latest fast response rockets and jet transports, secretly stored on Greta Island can tackle anything.
With agents across the world such as Lady Phenomenal and her trusty butler/chauffeur Parker (named such, because he can park the six wheeled RR) the Rapid Response team are ready for any eventuality, providing it involves something requiring long distant first class travel that is.
The rescue team need a visible villain to lend substance to their travel jaunts, sorry, sorry I mean rescue missions, sorry about that. Step forward the Hood, a balding character that has a striking resemblance to Michael Mann.
As Lady Phenomenal develops her catch phrase of ‘Jolly Hockey Sticks’ at the end of every successful climate rescue mission, the syndication of the groups activities on Netflix looks a no brainer…..just like their antics.

gyan1
January 2, 2023 10:34 am

False attribution is the basis for these idiotic claims. Circular reasoning locks their delusions into a closed loop of perception which no amount of logic, reason or empirical data can penetrate.

George Daddis
January 2, 2023 10:59 am

They start with a conclusion and then look for evidence to back it up.
If that is not the classic example of research bias I don’t know what is!

The is much worse than the infamous Doran and Zimmerman study where they set out to prove that 97% of “scientists” (where they had to keep changing the definition of “scientist” to make their point) believed global warming has a human cause.

Ulric Lyons
January 3, 2023 8:17 am

Brief Saharan plumes to the UK, like in July 2019 (which Otto did an attribution study on), are dependent on negative North Atlantic Oscillation conditions for a wavier jet stream pattern.

While the consensus of IPCC and UK Met Office circulation models predict increasingly positive NAO conditions with rising CO2 forcing. Hence the MetO UK climate projections for milder wetter winters and warmer drier summers with more frequent and longer duration heatwaves.

We know that negative NAO increases during low solar periods, so that’s when to expect the Saharan plumes.

https://archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3-5-6.html

gezza1298
January 4, 2023 7:34 am

Another star graduate of the Dr Josef Goebbels Institute of Truth…

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights