"Larger statistical variance caused by climate change results in outlier event that kills 90% of crab" isn't a great headline. What do you need to believe that climate change is a factor in this event? A sample size of 1 million? A deviation of 5 sigma?
This, in theory, changes every aspect of life by some amount, however minuscule or large it may be. In the case of king crab fishing though we haven't really seen a downward trend. What we've seen is some really good seasons, new techniques, and now very few fish. People like to explain everything away due to climate change but it seems more logical to me this is random deviation or the result of new technology or bad practices by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Assuming this follows a normal distribution we would expect a shortage of crab by over 2 standard deviations in 50 year intervals (or after ~25 years of beginning our recording), and below 3 standard deviations if we repeat this 20 times. We could explain this away perfectly fine without invoking climate change
