Brilliant! Tony is a beacon of light and reason in an ocean of insanity

I questioned several meteorologists about the anticipated background natural climate stability and variability. There are several cycles, and cycles in cycles, mainly only recognized in retrospect with a large and unavoidable error range. Modelling has never been close. In fact, after 5-10 years of prediction, the model is assumed unreliable. Yet 30 year predictions are still given with low, medium and high likelihood. There are even a low probability of global cooling (5-8%) in the model that is labelled global warming. It is as likely as a further plus 2 degrees Celsius warming. In fact reverting to the 20th centuries average is the likeliest scenario before 'scientific' analysis interpretation, followed by 1 degree of warming. These two scenarios account for over 50% of all outcomes. Almost 2/3 of outcomes if cooling is included. Given this science is in it infancy, unreliable and untested, should any prediction be given more than academic scrutiny?

Thank you. LETS GO BRANDON