[RedDevil]

The idea of a model is not to take all data into account. Instead, the model should predict what the data would look like, and measurements should statistically approach these values when the sample window size grows if the model is correct, and not if it is not.

The golden rule is that you cannot prove a model correct by verifying it against the data used to calibrate the model (obviously). So the only way to do that is to see how it does against data outside of that scope.

Almost all models predicted a rise in global temperatures and sea level. And sure enough, year over year we see those rise. So they seem to approach reality fairly good.

Now if you believe it is all a hoax, there is a simple solution. Devise a climate model that does align with the data we know but for the future trends to whatever you believe is going to happen, like the infamous upcoming ice age. Then wait and see if the model outperforms the other models that do predict further heating.

As for the ice age, I see no signs at all of it happening. If anything the Earth's temperature rise is accelerating.
But if there will be an ice age after all, the people to endure that will forever curse us for burning the fossil fuel now that they could have used to avert it then. Whether it comes or not, our excessive burning of fossil fuel remains a burden on generations to come.