I have always said that I am not a big fan of forecasting – and, I think that measures of climate sensitivity are largely worthless – just because you can measure or calculate something does not mean that it is important.

That being said, Denier statements about climate model are based on ignorance and lies. Deniers not only are clueless about what models are and what they do, they stupidly believe that AGW theory is somehow based on and depends on climate model projections. The only contribution climate models have made to AGW theory are in the hindcasts, which are highly accurate. There is nothing in AGW theory that in any way predicts, requires, depends upon, or in any way has anything to do with model projections.

The fact that Deniers are unaware of something so fundamental is just more evidence that they know even less about climate and science than people who do not know anything – and it is this commitment to being actively pro-stupid that makes them Deniers.

Because no model has yet made an accurate prediction. I suggest that the climate data from the models be published to show what the climate will be for the next 100 years at 6 month intervals. If the climate models are accurate this shouldn't be a problem.

95% of the models are overestimating the current temps. If this does not indicate a bias, I don't know what would.

Further, your models look exponential. In fact, your models looking exponential is the cause of 95% of them overestimating the current temp. If they were linear, they would not be showing such bias.

You think it is a simple matter of warmer or colder. It is not. If I predict a cake is going to rise, and you find I am accurate, will you then believe me when I say it is going to continue to expand exponentially until it covers the world???

The solutions your side is proposing are not based upon whether or not the temps will continue to rise. If we were dealing with another 0.8 degrees of rise over the next 100 years (as we saw in the last 100 years), we would have plenty of time to deal with CO2 reductions without spending trillions and trying to pass another regressive tax.

It is only with the exponential-looking models that we get to trillions in expenditures. Models that are overestimating so much, that bias is clearly a factor.

There are legitimate questions about computer models, particularly forecasting. An answer to jello^tm's questions about predicting temperature five years from now is that several factors influencing temperature, such as the Sun, ENSO, PDO, volcanoes, and even the amount of carbon dioxide that humans put into the atmosphere are difficult to predict.

But, denialists are not interested in facts. They talk about climate models as if they were the only reason to believe that carbon dioxide absorbs infra-red, even though John Tyndall showed that it does back in 1851.

America is only a small part of the globe! You've had colder winters in America in recent years because global warming is melting the artic i . the ice run off is cooling the Atlantic. there is nothing fake about global warming . Temperature records show it . It is the question of how much mans activity has contributed to global warming or whether it is natural warming that is harder to prove . Scientists have no political bias .Governments of both left and right believe in it. Most climatologists think that man has had some effect.

Warming or cooler? H-m-m-m! Great thinking. You don't need a computer, All you need is to flip a coin. Cheese! You are so simple.

OMG you have to be joking, not only have not one climate model predicted the pause, they cannot even hindcast, they have proven to be totally useless, tossing a coin would produce better results.

They say if you tell a big enough lie and tell it often enough people will believe it. I must not be people cause it is damn cold around here already.

it's been getting colder....

for the past few years, we've been getting record breaking snow falls successively that they changed it to "global climate change" because "warming" would be inaccurate

I think this might have something to do with it ...