Not sure about that...
Gambling in it's many forms is strictly a numbers game...so many combinations and so many chances to win...at some point you will win...you will be broke, but you won!!!
Climate change is much more complex and so many unknowns you can't figure into your prediction.
I think it's apples and oranges...JMHO
I’m not claiming the principle of being able to predict large-scale outcomes while being unable to predict small-scale ones applies to weather/climate.
Only that the principle exists, and so claiming that climate predictions are inherently invalid because our ability to predict the weather is strictly limited is not a good argument.
I think the argument you make here is a much better one.
To accurately predict climate one would need to know what all the factors are, exactly how they interact with each other, and what the feedback mechanisms are. And we just DON’T have that knowledge.
Given the complexity of the question, we probably never will.
Since all these many factors are not really determinable, many of them are SWAGs (Scientific Wild Ass Guesses). Then they estimate (guess) how these guessed-at factors interact.
Then the guesses about guesses are fed through a computer program, which gives it a surface appearance of quantification and rigorous analysis.
But it doesn’t matter how precisely you analyze a series of guesses, they remain guesses.
Or, GIGO. A great deal of the data that goes into these computer projections is essentially Garbage.
Yet people treat the computer projections as Fact, because they come out of a computer.
I’ve seen this very odd psychological mechanism at work myself in my line of business.
I am sometimes asked to analyze estimates/invoices provided for certain services for their reasonableness.
Most of these estimates are produced by computer estimating software. Most people presented with a computer estimate/invoice act like it’s somehow beyond question.
Yet a good (or dishonest) estimator can make that estimating system produce whatever bottom line he wants it to. A computer program is only a tool. It does not itself produce results or accuracy. That is utterly and entirely dependent on what is fed into it.