Claim: While there are uncertainties with climate models, they successfully reproduce the past and have made predictions that have been subsequently confirmed by observations.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: These models are the basis for model predictions of future climate, such as are discussed by the IPCC.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: Nevertheless, within three years most of the basic assumptions made by Rowland and Molina were confirmed by laboratory measurements and by direct observation in the stratosphere.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: This new explanation is used to make falsifiable predictions that are testable by experiment or observation.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: When uncertainties in models and observations are properly accounted for, newer observational data sets (with better treatment of known problems) are in agreement with climate model results.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Climate models are mathematical models of past, present and future climates.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Climate models include different external forcings for their models.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate (considerable progress since the 1990 report in distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic influences on climate, because of: including aerosols; coupled models; pattern-based studies) Climate is expected to continue to change in the future (increasing realism of simulations increases confidence; important uncertainties remain but are taken into account in the range of model projections) There are still many uncertainties (estimates of future emissions and biogeochemical cycling; models; instrument data for model testing, assessment of variability, and detection studies) The Third Assessment Report (TAR) was completed in 2001 and consists of four reports, three of them from its Working Groups: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability Working Group III: Mitigation Synthesis Report A number of the TAR's conclusions are given quantitative estimates of how probable it is that they are correct, e.g., greater than 66% probability of being correct.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Third Assessment Report, says: "While the radiative forcing due to greenhouse gases may be determined to a reasonably high degree of accuracy... the uncertainties relating to aerosol radiative forcings remain large, and rely to a large extent on the estimates from global modelling studies that are difficult to verify at the present time".

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: These and other aspects of modelled climate change are in agreement with observations.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Climatology considers the past and can help predict future climate change.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Modeling is used for understanding past, present and potential future climates.