One thing I learned in thermal modeling of spacecraft is that applying "fudge factors" to make results match test data does not make the model robust enough to correctly predict temperature in other situations. The only way to make the model robust is to correctly model all physical phenomena. Sometimes that means that unknown but important physical phenomena must be identified and then incorporated into the model. This experience made me skeptical about the validity of of the General Circulation Models that are used to predict the earth climate 100 or more years from now. I suspected that not all important phenomena were even recognized, let alone being incorporated in the models. I suspected that not only were some important parameters not include in the GCMs, but that some were not only unknown, but are also not amenable to prediction, such as far-in-the-future sunspot activity. Joe Bastardi has an opinion similar to mine. He also thinks, as I do, that the only credible earth temperature record is that provided by satellites. I have long suspected that the records of NCDC, NOAA, NASA/GISS, and HadCRU were being manipulated. Recent events reveal that this suspicion was justified.