Hansen defined three scenarios. We are running at the CO2 increase rate most closely described by his A Scenario. I don't know what you are appealing to. He set the parameters for the assessment of the accuracy and he made the prediction.
He and everyone else in this discipline are unable to make an accurate prediction. This does not make them evil or conspiratorial or swindlers. It only means they are not yet capable of making an accurate prediction. Why are they unable? I would hope it is because they cannot coordinate the thousands of interactions that create the climate in their models. Jansen certainly missed. He missed by plenty. We are less warm than he thought we would be if the CO2 actually decreased.
The CO2 has increased at the rates it was increasing when he made his hunch prediction. He was wrong.
Why do you continue to say that wrong is right?
The three scenarios and their predictions are defined by Hansen 1988 as follows
“Scenario A assumes continued exponential trace gas growth, …” Hansen’s predicted temperature increase, from 1988 to 2012, is 0.9 ⁰C, OVER FOUR TIMES HIGHER than the actual increase of 0.22 ⁰C.
“scenario B assumes a reduced linear growth of trace gases, …” Hansen’s predicted temperature increase, from 1988 to 2012, is 0.75 ⁰C, OVER THREE TIMES HIGHER than the actual increase of 0.22 ⁰C.
“scenario C assumes a rapid curtailment of trace gas emissions such that the net climate forcing ceases to increase after the year 2000.” Hansen’s predicted temperature increase, from 1988 to 2012, is 0.29 ⁰C, ONLY 31% HIGHER than the actual increase of 0.22 ⁰C.
So, only Scenario C, which “assumes a rapid curtailment of trace gas emissions” comes close to the truth.
THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTUAL “CURTAILMENT OF TRACE GAS EMISSIONS”
As everyone knows, the Mauna Loa measurements of atmospheric CO2 proves that there has NOT BEEN ANY CURTAILMENT of trace gas emissions. Indeed, the rapid increase of CO2 continues unabated."