Climate Attribution Studies Can’t Be Trusted

The latest from Briggs... [Gilder's Daily Prophecy] April 28, 2021 [UNSUBSCRIBE]( | [ARCHIVES]( External Advertisement [Play the Historic Wealth Event of the Year]( [blue chart graph and money sign]( powerful will it be? Well, $353 billion is going right into the balance sheets of these small stocks. And by our strategist’s calculations, [five companies]( will have the most impressive 12- to 18-month trajectory: Stock 1 – 160% growth. Stock 2 – 108% growth. Stock 3 – 140%. Stock 4 – 108%. Stock 5 – 129%. [Go here to see all five.]( [Warning] Do you enjoy receiving Gilder's Daily Prophecy? Please [Click Here Now]( so we know to continue sending you Gilder's Daily Prophecy for free! Climate Attribution Studies Can’t Be Trusted [George Gilder]Dear Daily Prophecy Reader, Below, you’ll find the latest from William Briggs. Keep scrolling to read his thoughts… Benny Peiser at the Global Warming Policy Foundation asked me to investigate so-called climate attribution studies. I did. They don’t work. Since that’s too brief a judgment, even though accurate, I expanded the critique somewhat. Here’s the press release: A paper published today shows that attempts to blame extreme weather on human-caused global warming are “overconfident and probably wrong.” The paper, by statistician and philosopher of science Dr William M Briggs, reveals that mainstream attribution science is beset by flaws of reasoning, modelling and data. Dr Briggs points out that most attribution claims are based around comparing simulations of the climate today to simulations of the climate as it might have been without human activity. But as he explains, this approach has a fundamental problem: “We simply have little or no idea what the climate would have been without human activity. Moreover, we can’t ever know what it was like.” And Dr. Briggs also points out that even if we did know, it would still not be enough. “In order to attribute individual weather events to humankind, scientists need a perfect model of the climate. They do not have this. Therefore, claims that we are responsible for any particular weather event are at best overconfident, if not plain wrong.” Attribution studies assume that the weather has been getting worse, yet empirical observations do not support this generic assumption. Dr Briggs’s paper is entitled [The Climate Blame Game: Are we really causing extreme weather?]( I owe the title to Andrew Montford, author of [The Hockey Stick Illusion]( and who blogs as a piece of topography known as [Bishop Hill](. [Download the paper here.]( And then give it to those who now call global cooling global warming. I mean climate change. I mean [climate emergency]( (thanks to reader Ann Cherry for the link). If the elite, media, and rulers have learned anything this past year, it is that panic works. Frightening the populace allows them to gain power. “Oh, Briggs. You exaggerate as always. Nobody really believes they’ll use dangerous global warming as a political move.” That so? [CNN tweet] The pandemic has given them a trial run, all right. Yep. ["Trillions of Dollars Are at Stake," Says #1 Futurist...]( A warning from history for all Americans [crisis management centered]( Imagine living through a crisis so damaging that the trash piles up in the streets because no one will collect it… …where the dead go unburied because no one will bury them… …where the government mandates a reduced “three day working week” to save energy… …where people are told to brush their teeth in the dark… can’t drive faster than 50mph to save gas… and are told to share baths to conserve water… If you think this is some fictional account of an economic collapse, you’re wrong. It happened in living memory in one of the richest and most powerful countries in the world. According to one of America’s top analysts, who publicly called the 2008 crash, America is on the verge of making the exact same mistake – and suffering a similar fate. [Get the full story here.]( [Copy of Official Approval Enclosed (tech)]( Central Criticism Leaving out all the qualifications and caveats and necessary details — meaning if you want to critique my critique you must read the paper, which is free and which doesn't cost nuthin,’ and not just this post — here is the main problem with climate-attribution studies. A bad — never good! — weather events are identified, usually because it has just occurred, introducing two observation biases into climate-attribution studies: one because only bad events are examined, and the second because it uses what was just observed. A so-called climate change model (i.e. of the current climate) is run to say the probability of the bad weather event is P_1. A second model, but this one of the “natural” climate, is run, and it says the probability of the bad weather event is P_0. The “natural” climate is, they say, that which is untainted by man. If P_1 > P_0, the bad event is said to be caused, at least in part, by man. Quite obviously, if the climate change model is imperfect — I mean this word strictly — it’s estimate of P_1 is useless or highly suspect. Are climate change models perfect? No, sir, they are not. They do a poor job, especially at modeling local extremes. The estimates P_1 therefore don’t have much to do with real life. Maybe not as obviously, the natural climate model also has to be perfect. Are they? Alas, we shall never know. There is no way to check, no way at all. Ever. It is a model of what the atmosphere would look like if man never touched it. It can therefore not be checked, because man has touched the atmosphere. The estimates P_0 therefore are unknowns. Comparing two numbers which have too much certainty does not grant certainty, it increases uncertainty. Add to all this the very real possibility of tuning the models so juice the results in one’s favor, as I suspect some (cited in the paper) have done, and a host of other problems — like how to go about calculating P_i — we conclude climate attribution studies should not be used for any decision making. Though it is an easy prediction to say they will be used to generate fear. Go [here]( for the full update. -William Briggs Regards, [George Gilder] George Gilder Editor, Gilder's Daily Prophecy 5G: Dead on Arrival (DOA)? [white skull with red background]( much awaited 5G is beset with problems. To make matters worse…the big cable companies do not have any solutions for some of them… and so 5G could be doomed even before it fully takes off. The good news is you don’t need to throw out your expensive 5G phones. There is a breakthrough new technology that will work with 5G phones, 4G phones, and even outdated 3G phones. And it has advantages that 5G can never have. The best part is this new technology is backed by the richest man in the world. [To know more about what could arguably be the future of smart phones and internet, Click Here.]( [Three founders Publishing]( To end your Gilder's Daily Prophecy e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Gilder's Daily Prophecy, feel free to [click here](. If you are having trouble receiving your Gilder's Daily Prophecy subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting Gilder's Daily Prophecy](. Gilder's Daily Prophecy is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. Please read [our Privacy Statement.]( For any further comments or concerns please email us at GildersDailyProphecy@threefounderspublishing.com. Nothing in this e-mail should be considered personalized financial advice. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We expressly forbid our writers from having a financial interest in any security recommended to our readers. All of our employees and agents must wait 24 hours after online publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. © 2021 Three Founders Publishing, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Protected by copyright laws of the United States and international treaties. This newsletter may only be used pursuant to the subscription agreement and any reproduction, copying, or redistribution (electronic or otherwise, including on the world wide web), in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of Three Founders Publishing, LLC. EMAIL REFERENCE ID: 401GDPED01