Thanks, but the animation is unfortunate, because the later predictions are compared to shorter periods and make predictions about the past (so most likely they

Thanks, but the animation is unfortunate, because the later predictions are compared to shorter periods and make predictions about the past (so most likely they were fitted against them). Of course it looks like a good match. At least they are honest enough to put a dashed line. In general the climate science has been very sloppy so they lost a lot of trust. This starts with the name greenhouse effect that describes something different from the main effect in a greenhouse (warm air cannot escape vs reflected radiation). And goes on with melting glaciers in the Himalayas in the next 30 years. Climate gate didn’t increase trust either. Of course this doesn’t prove that climate scientists are wrong. But they appear more confident than they should.