The concept basically fell apart months ago. If you've noticed, there's damn little in the news on the science and evidence lately. Everything proceeds as though climate change (a slight alteration in terms to make the concept even more vague) is a revealed truth, not to be questioned. There's way too much power and money tied up in it now.

"Fractional risk attribution" is another term for creative mathematical bullshit, extremely vulnerable to undetectable "tweaking." I've seen papers like this before - and not just in the climate field - with pages and pages of heavy statistical math, smoothing curves, making assumptions, and beating on the numbers until they say what you want them to say.

Ben Santer's entire career depends on the existence of human-caused climate change. His position at Livermore is based on it. He's won awards for it and gotten huge grants for it. He's bet his entire reputation on it. He's one of many I could name, and they're not going down without a fight.

You are listening to the equivalent of an oil company executive telling you how critical oil is to our society. I've made the point dozens of times that a large segment of the scientific community is deeply invested in this idea. The flap over those released e-mails a while back showed how deeply.

Meanwhile, the disaster predictions of recent years, the justifications for massive state control of industry and transfers of wealth, continue to fail, being pushed off another ten, twenty, thirty years.