The vast majority of papers on climate science adhere to these principles, and indeed many papers devote the majority of their content to describing the hypotheses and methods used to tackle the particular problem being studied. However, the arguments that get bandied about in blogs and debates invariably focus solely on the predicted impacts of climate change, without any discussion of the caveats and assumptions that lie behind the models.
We all know that the world's average temperature hasn't changed much for ten or fifteen years. As a result, warnings about dangerous global warming appear to have been awry. Static temperatures for the last decade don't disprove the predictions of pessimistic climate models, but they do make them less likely.
One certainty in the world of climate science is that climate sceptics are constantly looking for gaps in how climate science is being reported in order to exploit them and fundamentally question whether climate change is actually happening.