Yes one can read such in many places.
One can also note that current computer models on which such statements about climate dependancy on CO2 are based, exclude the contributions of phenomena associated with solar activity and orbital inclination as primary drivers in the system.
The climate models used are rooted in apriori assumptions that thermal multiplying factors operate on the direct radiative effects of CO2, and somehow without operating on other thermal contributors to atmospheric temperature in equal manner.
To be blunt about it, no global climate model comes close to describing the atmosphere and the factors driving climate. All are very poor and simplistic representations at their very best, and ad-hoc accomodations to pre-conceived conclusions at their worst.
Your arguments ring true. Simulation often recreates assumptions. Certainly economic models can give the modeler exactly what he wants. Computer models are interesting, informative, sometimes generate insight and persuade. But computer models are not data, much less proof. We can predict the motion of the planets (with or without computers). But I think most other long term planning is unreliable.