Climate projections cannot be validated Claudia Tibaldi and Reto Knutti (2007): “Skill and reliability are assessed by repeatedly comparing many independent realizations of the true system with the model predictions through some metric that quantifies agreement between model forecasts and observations (e.g. rank histograms). For projections of future climate change over decades or longer, there is no verification period, and in a strict sense there will never be any, even if we wait for a century...climate projections, decades or longer in the future by definition, cannot be validated directly through observed changes.”

Thus, there is no scientific theory of a climate climate change because you cannot validate the model.

The meaning of a proposition lies between the relation between the theory and the observation.

The meaning of a statement lies in the process of its verification.

Post-hoc generalizations have no functional meaning. If you can’t predict anything with your ‘theory’, how can you predict what the engineering would do? In this case, how do you know reducing greenhouse gases or eating less meat will do anything? Answer is you don’t know because you can’t predict anything. The reason there are no predictions is there are no operational definitions being tied to observable phenomena. Let alone, a validation of those operational definitions if they had them.