[SeekAndFind]

The following plot shows the 50-year area-averaged temperature trend during 1973-2022 for the 12-state corn belt as observed with the official NOAA homogenized surface temperature product (blue bar) versus the same metric from 36 CMIP6 climate models (red bars, SSP245 emissions scenario, output here).

To put it in less technical terms, the climate doom-sayers were wrong. Again. As they always are.

[TomGuy]

wildly inaccurate climate models were compared to the actual measured temperature trend

I wonder how that compares with the ole Farmer's Almanac?

[logi_cal869]

They don’t care.

I accidentally came across these just tonight (the propaganda is accelerating):

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/terrifying-nasa-video-shows-visible-carbon-emissions/ar-AA1cQcuT

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/nasa-animation-shows-sea-level-rise-in-past-30-years/vi-AA1cTRj3

[sauropod]

.

[grame]

They just use it to their favor by using the lower temps are because of cooling when the don’t match the predictions. They can have it both ways.

[threefinger]

There are many variations on the Scientific Method but two obligatory steps in all of them are, a) empirically and objectively assess the accuracy of your model, and b) adjust your model to reflect observed outcomes.

If your model fails to fall in line with observed data over any significant length of time, you are not using a scientific method.