All scientific enterprises that might impact public policy should have a "red team" consisting of the most eminent critics of the dominant theory, who should be funded at least as well as any project based on the dominant theory.
Despite the futility of long-term prediction of a non-linear dynamical system with multiple inputs, likely include some unknown unknowns, I'd really like to see what model would be built if one tried to model the earth's climate without assuming greenhouse gasses drove the warming from the end of the Little Ice Age around the middle of the Industrial Revolution to the present, and tried to honestly sort out the contributions of all known climate cycles, effects of both solar irradiance and solar magnetism modulating cosmic ray cloud seeding, greenhouse gas emission, soot emissions changing the albedo of ice packs, and land-use changes (including especially aggregate urban heat island effect).
We know the alarmists have falsely attributed to greenhouse gas emissions at least some warming due to aggregate urban heat island effects, because their models by and large are built using urban and suburban weather stations for the time sequences. We also know they either ignore or falsely attribute to greenhouse gas warming, changes to ice pack albedo due to light absorbing impurities (e.g. soot).
