I mean turning on the "weather channel" and having it say it's sunny out, only to look outside to see pouring rain across the entire city. That's pretty inaccurate in my book.

Where in god's name do you live where the distinction between sun and rain is beyond the skill of your weather people?

That has nothing to do with the temperature.

It's all linked together, and while that statement had nothing to do with temperature, the same can be said in my area with regard to that.

Also, if a meteorologist can't get the current state of the weather correct, why on earth would I trust his statement of what the temperature is going to be like? At that point I'm just going to consider it a guess.

It seems like your anecdote is quite beside the point here... as the comparison to forecasts was only illustrative of the fact that these models are not perfect representations of reality...

In reality, the models are derived using different methods by different scientists.

No, it really isn't. My point is that you can't draw conclusions to an accuracy greater than what is afforded to you by your prediction model, whether it's fore or aft. That's pretty on the point.

Do out of band "aftcasts" correctly show the decade-long global warming hiatus from 1998 to 2008? [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_hiatus

Anyone who thinks this is an issue doesn't understand trends and variance. It's a high-school level failure of mathematics.

I suspect you fall prey to a question of scope. I imagine you spend more time with statisticians than, say, paleoceanographers and geologists. They might say, and reasonably so, that my reference to the ten year "break" in alleged global warming is irrelevant (as you say it is) and that your reference to a purely centurial warming trend is just as irrelevant. They might then accuse you of failing to understand variance and of having failed high school mathematics.

Ironically I'd say the whole point is that you are failing to look at the scope.

I didn't reference centurial anything - I said that thinking it's a problem is not understanding variance. Climate scientists not only agree with me they say the same thing.

So at this point either put up some actual science or just stop JAQing off.