The misconception that weather extremes are increasing in frequency has been amplified by so-called extreme event attribution studies. These studies attempt to describe the extent to which specific extreme weather events are influenced by anthropogenic climate change. However, they are deeply flawed, with errors in both science and interpretation, and have been created for legal and political rather than scientific reasons. Amongst scientific shortcomings are a lack of appropriate peer review, faulty statistics and the ignoring of important evidence. Flawed methodological practices include the improper use of temperature datasets, a lack of sufficient attention to uncertainties in the data, and the neglect of historical records. In context, it is to be noted that IPPC AR6 WG1 found no trend in numbers or
intensity of most types of extreme weather events. This had been politically problematic for climate activists, who then created extreme event attribution in order to pursue climate litigation against fossil fuel companies. The origins of this climate lawfare date back to a 2012 meeting of US environmental advocates, climate scientists and others. It was at this meeting that the idea of reframing the attribution of extreme weather to climate change was born, bolstering the political narrative that we are now in a “climate crisis”, which is “demonstrable” in every extreme weather event. This is a fascinating topic that will doubtless attract keen interest and a wide-ranging Q&A and discussion.