It was proven a while ago that there exists organisations governmental and independent that have actively taken steps to produce and publish inaccurate forecasts and trending data, through means of bullying, data set omission and in basic terms cooking the books.

Someone mentioned that we have centuries of data measurements, where this is untrue, we have only been recording and trending data from the past 60 or so years. We have been using methods of estimating past temperatures that have been shown to be inaccurate and only taken into account by those whose argument it agrees with and ignored or questioned by the other.

Man made climate change remains a strong argument and there definitely appears to be strong evidence even if just localized. The IPPC have changed their tune from 'global warming' to man made climate change due to these false assertions and the fact that we have dropped from having the fact of global warming which has been proven, including the hockey stick diagram, to be a wholly biased report that was generated to prove a group of scientist belief in a dramatically unscientific manner.

Whether or not our beliefs lead us to whatever opinion on the fact is inconsequential. But yes, all future predicitions for climate change are and must be done via statisical analysis of the best information we have available, and although this could be done by an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of typewriters (which is sometimes how I feel the public face of 'science' appears) it is invariably done with computers and auto generation. (But I suppose thats' like saying Cars are auto generated by robots)