'Normally, in the scientific method, you make a prediction based on a hypothesis, then observe to see if your prediction comes true. If not, you discard the hypothesis and get a new one. In the arena of climate science, apparently, different rules apply. If your prediction is wrong, you redouble your search for mechanisms to explain the “variance”. There is no chance the underlying theory is wrong, or even flawed. How bad did the climate establishment miss their projections? Former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer has collected 73 model forecasts, and compared them to observations'