Not one so called climate model has been scientifically verified. In other words they are not sufficiently accurate to be trusted. They are a scientific goal of the climate scientists, but unachieved so far. In practical terms none predicted the pause in temperature rise over the last two decades, the vast majority have predicted higher temperature rises than have actually been observed and measured (a difficult thing in itself) and the dilemma is that the scientists can’t explain the growing difference between their highly expensive and complicated models and the real world observations that are the basis of science.
So we should not be making decisions with weighty consequences on projections of computer models that are unverified. Would you trust your cargo loading and stability to a new computer model that came with the warning “not verified” but it’s our best guess?
Top this off with the more recent revelations that up to 50% of peer reviewed papers in the scientific literature are unable to be replicated. This included medical studies. Your heart disease treatment may well be based on rubbish science. Attempts to prove this wrong by a sceptical research group actually tried to replicates a large number of studies and found over 50% were unable to be replicated ie false. That’s the scientific method.
My plea to all on this forum is to not be so trusting of esoteric science in the new field of climate science, not to drink the Kool Aid of scientists predicting climate armageddon despite the world surviving reasonably well for a few billion years.
Why am I pretty much all alone?