Read here. There are purposefully perpetuated climate science myths and falsehoods spread by peer-reviewed publications with hopes of influencing policymakers and the taxpaying public. One perpetual myth, which is without any scientific empirical evidence supporting it, is the assertion that IPCC-like climate models are skillful or successful at regional predictions.
It is common knowledge that these global climate models are abject failures at global predictions for a multitude of reasons, and can't be made better by having them produce regional predictions instead, such as predicting rainfall levels/trends in specific regions.
As one very prominent climate scientist, Roger Pielke Sr., states:
"There is a new article which perpetuates this myth that multi-decadal global model predictions are skillful. This, unfortunately is just one example of many who are making unsubstantiated scientific claims, yet, whose research is being accepted in peer reviewed journals and being funded by the National Science Foundation and other agencies...It is clear that considerable research funding is being provided to support what is not following the scientific method...The acceptance of hypotheses as facts in the publication process including this Ren et al 2011 paper, is one main reason that the policy community is being significantly misinformed about the actual status of our understanding of the climate system and the role of humans within it."
Additional climate-model postings.
