We knew that. Below is linked a discussion by a respected climate scientist who says the models are bunkum.
There is a Prof at U Penn, Scott Armstrong, who asserts he can create reliable predictions. His protocol for good predictive model has more than 100 elements.
That makes sense as long as the elements have reliable information and are based on reliable observed and replicable experimental evidence.
The Forcing side of the climate models and their lack of mitigators creates this run away train modeling.
And that doesn’t even deal with the problems of the projected catastophic effects of warming, which are nothing more than speculations built on political agendas.
As an old man I disagree with the theory that 57 degrees F is good and warm is bad. The projected health and environmental problems from warming really are not part of the problems of the models, but they do demonstrate junk science in another context in the warming projections of the IPCC.
Am I breathless–no just respectful of the uncertainties. Physicists know stuff so well that sometimes they can predict very acurately what hasn’t been discovered or how things will work. They could predict the Higgs Boson and other elementary particles based on their calculations and experiments, but predicting in a complex uncertain environment like climate studies is not so easy.