The key word: TUNING. Every climate model has tons of tunable parameters, many of which are not from first principles. They are empirical, observed some years ago over some remote locations, but now applied globally as the truth.
"Skeptics have scoffed at climate models for decades, saying they overstate the hazards of carbon dioxide. But a growing body of research shows many climate models have been uncannily accurate. For one recent study, scientists at NASA, the Breakthrough Institute in Berkeley, Calif., and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology evaluated 17 models used between 1970 and 2007 and found most predicted climate shifts were “indistinguishable from what actually occurred.”
Isn't this just the green jelly bean test?[1] If you have hundreds of models, won't some of them line up well just by random chance?
