Sorry to use a quote from you to explain the issue that others are having here, but it simplifies things a bit.
First off, what question did you ask the model to answer above? - it appears that you simply asked if the climate was changing.
But the issue here is one of warming vs cooling. So let's see if the model can predict one or the other. But, alas, it sometimes predicts warming, and sometimes predicts cooling.
How does it do this? Well first, there is a vast number of initial condition inputs. They are made up of things like atmospheric temps at different altitudes, ocean temps, ocean currents, ground reflectivity, and too many more to list. All of those initial condition inputs have a margin of error (ex. 1.2c avg with 1.1c to 1.3c margin of error).
Next, you have the "weight" of those known variables, and the known margin of error for that "weight". And even now, among climate change enthusiast scientists, the actual "weight" of c02 is still being revised down.
Then you get into the dynamics of the running model. Questions like if ocean cooling does occur locally or globally, is the rate of ocean c02 uptake linear? - which leads to hundreds of other questions that cannot be answered. So in place of answers, assumptions are put in place. For each assumption, a substitute assumption is also available to be run in the model.
On top of that, some runs of the model with different margin of errors inputs, weights to variables, and assumptions, show inconsistencies pointing toward missing variables. And when some of these variables are discovered, their inclusion in the model points toward more missing variables.
All along, the predictions of the evolving model not only produce both warming and cooling, but can be MADE to show one or the other by adjusting variables within the margin of error.
So, how much value do you really give to a bunch of politicians, politically/emotionally motivated scientists, and pushers of propaganda, telling you they are certain of the course of the climate from our current modeling capabilities? Especially, when logic dictates that a warming climate is tolerable, but a cooling climate is famine, death, WW3, and actual mass extinction.