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.
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
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”.
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.
Climate change has had such an impact on our world, the press releases now just seem to write themselves! /sarc
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.
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.
And don’t call him “Stupid”.. . .
Or Shirley.
The ambulance chasing profession is expanding.
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.
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).
Ambulance chasing, coat trailing, street walking, sideshow alley spruiking, media managing ‘science communicators’ is actually a new profession coming out of climate scientophosy.
“deep, rigorous statistical analysis” seems a bit conflicted with “rapid reaction force”.
I’d like to see their rigorous attribution analysis for deconvoluting natural vs human caused effects.
They won’t allow it because it would expose their corruption.
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.
Was it Ross McKittrick who blew up their statistical algorithm? Something about violating the G-M limit on statistical validity?
But they sound impressive. You weren’t meant to catch the conflict part.
Yea, I think I strained an eye-roll muscle on that one.
Superman really exists! Now I can sleep quietly.
Is her “deep, rigorous statistical analysis” a Magic Eight Ball with only one answer, climate change due to greenhouse gasses?
I think “deep, rigorous statistical analysis” means they’re using a computer model that says what they tell it to say.
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.
errata:- the correct term is “scientossophists”
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!
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.
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!
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.
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.
Your comment was caused by
Climate Change!
Comment Attribution Team
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
Rabid Reaction Force
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
How old are these people, are they ‘out of diapers’ yet, does their mother know what they’re planning?
No matter, they
‘re 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
Do the BBC etc really need to be told by Otto et al?
I don’t think they do.
“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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
No, not until net zero greenhouse emissions, but until policies are in place.
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.
You are right.
If they have it figured out so well why can’t they predict each event in advance?
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.
“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.”
She’s writing for her base, not a thinking public.
Good point.
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
“rapid reaction force of climate scientists”
Is that what their calling their PR branch?
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.
They just want to date climate change!
“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.
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.
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.
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.
At least her sneakers are green.
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.
The philosophy of physics.
Who knew there was such a thing?
”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.
Yes, we need to judge by the content, not the label.
The sneakers are for rapid reaction
Play the ball not the (wo)man