"Retrospectively comparing future model projections to observations provides a robust and independent test of model skill. Here we analyze the performance of climate models published between 1970 and 2007 in projecting future global mean surface temperature (GMST) changes. Models are compared to observations based on both the change in GMST over time and the change in GMST over the change in external forcing. The latter approach accounts for mismatches in model forcings, a potential source of error in model projections independent of the accuracy of model physics. We find that climate models published over the past five decades were skillful in predicting subsequent GMST changes, with most models examined showing warming consistent with observations, particularly when mismatches between model‐projected and observationally estimated forcings were taken into account."
Just look at this graph comparing the predictions from 1990 to the actual observations: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Cli...
It's wild how many people believe this is still "in dispute" but then again, that's what Exxon and Chevron paid big bucks for, nonstop merchants of endless doubt.
Perhaps murica is, as usual, an outlier among generally educated countries, but let's not pretend like there is too much dispute to get things done on this topic, or that denying it is anything more than a conspiracy theory with a vocal troll/joke aspect to it as well as a couple of real conspiracy theorists.
The biggest problem is that people don't believe they can do anything. A family member of mine wants to put a solar park in a nearby field. "Great!" I said, "I'll chip in!" Realizing I wasn't doing it for monetary gain (I don't live nearby enough to really profit from it), they then told me to not be "more catholic than the pope" (not sure if that translates well) and wouldn't accept the money I wanted to put towards this directly effective good cause. They (singular) are not doing it for the climate, they don't believe it will make a difference. They think it's a good investment for their own riches. But they don't think climate is a non-issue, just that they can't do anything about it, nor believe that there would be a sufficient majority to collectively (i.e. have the government) do something about it.
I mean, they're right about this being absolute peanuts, but the presence of solar fields and wind turbines also sends a message to those who learn of it: we can do this, we are doing things, it is economical, let's go for it.
I mean any advertisement comment thread, as in fairly general targeting, on Facebook or Instagram that even remotely references climate change is flooded to the brim with kooks and nativist conspiracy theories.
It's just an avalanche of fruitcakes and unhinged wackos.
Hundreds, sometimes thousands of people talking about scientist conspiracies and just the looniest stuff. Sometimes the comments are effectively 100% cranks and wackos. It seems to be much more mainstream than I'm comfortable acknowledging
Nobody ever said fireball, but the average temperature moving multiples of degrees is already materializing in real world measurements.