Yep, and we still don't understand what causes ice ages.

Let's stop and think about that for a minute. We're still pretty darn ignorant of the climate. Look at a plot of temperature over the last mere million years. Climate scientists will at this point tell you they know all about the variation over the last few decades. But point to the huge swings that occur on ten-thousand-year timescales and periodically freeze the entire Earth over and they'll say "Yeah, well y'know, that could be a number of things..."

Climate science is a dodgy form of science. Too many model parameters, too few observations.

Climate Science isn't a science. For science to be science, you have to control for variables.

When you can't--like with climate studies--you rely on intuition instead. That's a social science.

That's going a bit far.

It's all well and good to come up with a model for what the climate should do based on basic physics. The main trouble with climate prediction is that we don't have enough data points to check whether the models are really correct.

I do physical modelling for a living, but I know not to trust a fitted-but-untested model any further than I can comfortably spit a rat.