The takeaway from the Discovery article:
Many politicians and climate skeptics have criticized computer models as erring on the side of predicting temperatures that are too hot and outcomes that are too apocalyptic with global warming. But Druyan said the problem is most computer models, especially when compared to their predictions of past observations, underestimate how bad global warming is. That's because they see too many rainy days, which tends to cool temperatures off, he said.
Let me remind the three people that read my blog though, that Arnold Kling doesn’t say climate science is false, but that it is inconclusive. Kling knows that there are some very adverse effects from CO2 levels and the like, but he is merely skeptical as to the rate of environmental degradation, as well as how much of that degradation is man made or cyclical. While I know so many people would disagree with Kling (and at times I do too), I welcome any attitude that says, “Please, let me see more evidence.”