Summary of #53 William M. Briggs on fixing broken science

00:00:00 - 00:35:00

William M. Briggs is a statistician who speaks about his experiences as a dissonant scientist and his skepticism of climate change and global warming. He criticizes climate change as a nonsensical and meaningless term that refers to anything bad that happens and argues that if global climate models cannot beat persistence in making predictions, then they should not be used. Briggs discusses situations such as the over-reliance on models by government experts where the alleged benefits of closing down farms are only model-produced benefits with no actual benefit, and after the COVID-19 pandemic, people are starting to realize that experts' solutions are not always based on the people's best interests. He argues that any model that exists should make predictions that can be checked by anyone so that there is transparency, which is currently lacking in climatology. Additionally, Briggs believes that most people care about the impacts of climate change on their daily lives, but the forecasts are uncertain and rely heavily on models, and people should not be certain about anything that is being said about climate change.

• 00:00:00 In this section, William M. Briggs introduces himself as a statistician and speaks about his experiences as a dissonant scientist. His journey began in cryptography in the Air Force, but he moved to meteorology and became a forecaster. He was then the editor for Monthly Weather Review in the early 2000s and has articles in the Journal of Climate and over 100 papers to his name. However, he became skeptical of global warming and climate change, which resulted in him being regularly cancelled for his opinions. He focuses on forecast verification in his work and has written several books, including Breaking the Law of Averages and Everything You Believe is Wrong.
• 00:05:00 In this section, William M. Briggs, a statistician who specializes in the philosophy of science, discusses the concept of "skill" in climate modeling and its implications. He argues that if a global climate model built by teams of hundreds of scientists cannot beat persistence in making predictions, then it should not be used. Briggs became skeptical about climate change during his Ph.D. studies at Cornell University, which was a time when the issue was heavily discussed in the media and promoted by celebrities like Al Gore. He also criticizes the term "climate change" as being nonsensical and meaningless, as it refers to anything bad that happens.
• 00:10:00 In this section, William M. Briggs discusses his experiences as a climate denier in academic circles and the consequences of being outspoken about his beliefs. He talks about losing jobs and friendships due to his views, but ultimately believes that it allowed him to do independent research and thinking on his own. Briggs currently works as a consultant and is involved in various projects, including looking at the nitrogen crisis in the Netherlands and challenging the validity of models relied on by the Dutch government.
• 00:15:00 In this section, William Briggs discusses the situation of closing farms and the over-reliance on models by government experts. He argues that the alleged benefits of closing down 3,000 farms in the Netherlands are only a model-produced benefit, and there is no actual benefit in doing so. Briggs notes that there are some rulers and experts who are genuine true believers, while others use the issue as an excuse to sell their solutions and political reasons. He refers to this situation as an "expertocracy," which seeks to use science as justification for their solutions, resulting in significant tangles. Briggs notes that after the COVID-19 pandemic and the faulty predictions made by experts such as Ferguson, people are starting to realize that experts' solutions are not always based on the people's best interests, and we need to exercise more caution when listening to them.
• 00:20:00 In this section, William M. Briggs talks about the domination of a select few scientists in the field of climatology, leading to silencing and cancelling of opposing voices. He likens this phenomenon to that of other branches of science and suggests that there needs to be a change in the power structure. Briggs believes that any model that exists should make predictions that can be checked by anyone so that there is transparency, which is currently lacking. He adds that if we understood the earth's climate, we would only need one model, but it depends on our goal.
• 00:25:00 In this section, William Briggs discusses the complexity of science as a whole and the broken aspects stemming from it. He mentions the initiative he is involved in, called the Broken Science Initiative, which aims to apply scientific criticism to science as a whole, given that every branch of science has its own issues. He also discusses his work on climate skepticism, which he believes is full of nonsense, including misplaced ideas in current models. Briggs states that activist climate change rhetoric and claims of climate attribution studies are mostly unscientific and just a way for people to transfer money from ordinary citizens to oligarchs or corporations, with no actual feasible solutions.
• 00:30:00 In this section, William Briggs discusses how many scientific practices are vastly over-certain, even though scientists themselves are not necessarily bad people. The focus should be on correcting the way science is conducted at a philosophical level. He points out that many of these errors are due to politics, and that we need to shame leaders into acknowledging blatant errors. To do this, we should use the power we've gained to challenge outrageous claims and awaken others to the truth. Additionally, he advocates for speaking to local politicians to push back against climate education that is pure indoctrination, which includes filling children's heads with ideological and political slogans.
• 00:35:00 In this section, William Briggs argues that climate change propaganda is being used to shape people's perceptions of reality and that it is the responsibility of adults to fight back. He notes that many young adults are considering not having children because of climate change. However, he believes that most people care about the impacts of climate change on their daily lives, such as the cost of food, but the forecasts are uncertain and rely heavily on models. He argues that people need to understand that models feed into other models and that the probability of these claims based on a chain of events is low, and therefore, people should not be certain about anything that is being said about climate change.