OK let's start with your reading comprehension problem, stevo.
What the quote you gave said is "The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected
present-day warming rate."
So, there is nothing there about invalidated models, as you claim, just that it would take a 1 in 20 sequence to beat 15 years without warming.
So if you get a greater than 15 year sequence without warming it is statistically quite significant, and might warrant thinking about.
That's all. I hope you now appreciate your misunderstanding of that.
