Climate Science models v. Sceptic reality

IPCC models getting mushy
“Third, what is commonly called the “mainstream” view of climate science is contained in the spread of results from computer models. What is commonly dismissed as the “skeptical” or “denier” view coincides with the real-world observations. Now you know how to interpret those terms when you hear them.” (Financial Post)
World’s top climate scientists confess: Global warming is just QUARTER what we thought – and computers got the effects of greenhouse gases wrong
“Back then, it said observed warming over the 15 years from 1990-2005 had taken place at a rate of 0.2C per decade, and it predicted this would continue for the following 20 years, on the basis of forecasts made by computer climate models.
But the new report says the observed warming over the more recent 15 years to 2012 was just 0.05C per decade – below almost all computer predictions.” (Daily Mail)
AR5: In what Prof Judith Curry describes as “incomprehensible to me” and I would describe as “delusional” given the failure of previous predictions and their own assertion that any human global warming must be smaller and therefore less important relevant to natural variation, the IPCC now says it is MORE CERTAIN that humans caused the 20th century warming. In the last report they said “very likely” when there are proven statistical tests that show natural variation can explain all the changes we saw in the 20th century. Now they say it is “extremely likely that human influence on climate caused more than half of the increase in global average surface temperature from 1951-2010.”