Re: talking of don't have a clue
As someone that has had close association to the world of meteorology, AC is right.
The best models the Met.Office have got are the short term forecast models (chemical vapour dispersal model (what used to be called NAME) and hurricane track prediction models), but all of these are easily verifiable, they can run the model, make the prediction and then compare reality to the prediction, so they know how accurate these models are (or not).
The behaviour of these meteorological phenomena last over a time period of days, so by gathering observation data the models can be verified, modified to improve their accuracy.
But climate, over hundreds, thousands of years is an all together very different story.
And the output of these models is being used by government to make long term strategic decisions.
The accuracy of the model is going to decrease over the run time of the model. The short term forecast models out to 3 days, 5 days become significantly inaccurate beyond the 5 days.
The Met. Office know this (and have known it for a long time) but only recently started trying to communicate to the public in the form of 'uncertainty' expressing percentages.
Anything beyond 5 days, take it with a pinch of salt.
So asking, requiring the Met.Office to produce accurate forecasts for years ahead (albeit it is an entirely different model, not just running the short term forecast model for a longer run time) and then basis an entire strategy which affects tens of millions of people is somewhat tenuous and questionable!