repoman
Contributor
The major problem with climate science is that the entirety of its argument about GW/CC is based entirely on computer models.
To this point in time they have proven to be spectacularly wrong. Science is based on scepticism. When a hypothesis is proposed, the true scientist constructs an experiment that will either validate the proposal, or reject it.
The problem with oxymoronic climate science is that all their hypotheses are aimed at some mythical point in the future, thereby making the construction of appropriate experiments impossible.
What ensues then is basically belief, which as Swizzle has already pointed out, which the alarmists/activists have taken up with religious fervour!
You are either very ignorant or a liar or a parrot for shills. This is the same as a creationist saying that only fossils are useful for proving or disproving evolution, when extant DNA is airtight proof of evolution.
I don't understand how you can be so wrong.