Well the predictions may have been out in their timing. The predictions are one thing, the scientific peer reviewed papers are another. If we agree that the body of knowledge that supports AGW is reprsented by the IPCC then I think you'll find their predictions are much more conservative and they also give a range due to the inherent errors and lack of precision in making such predictions.
As for: "The global temp was supposed to keep rising as CO2 rose, it hasn't. And they admit their models can't say why." That is contentious because a) no one can deny the trend is up, not you, not Bob Carter, not Steve Fielding (doesn't stop them though) and b) the latest NASA data released last night suggests the rise has been 0.19 degree in the last 25 years, which is up not down. You're also failing to add that the models fall apart completely if you take out the effect of human GHG's. So what you are doing in this instance is misrepresenting and twisting the facts. Usual story though. I am getting used to reading this kind of tripe so please excuse me if I am not being very diplomatic about it.
