Consider this chart:
95% of the models failed, including 100% of the models that predicted catastrophic runaway warming. If the NY AG is going to prosecute climate scientists for getting the science wrong, shouldn’t he be prosecuting the ones who actually, you know, got it wrong?
alanbrad’s comment is so good it deserves to be highlighted:
Suppose 95% of weather men predict it will rain 5 inches tomorrow. 2% predict it will rain less than 5 inches, and 3% predict it will sprinkle for a little while. The 95% are saying that you should spend $1000 each on flood insurance. The 3% are saying its not necessary. The 95% are saying the 3% aren’t real scientists, and their research shouldn’t be funded. Meanwhile a company that sells solar panels funds some scientists to say that it won’t rain at all.
The next day, it sprinkles. Now, the DA wants to prosecute the company that sells solar panels.
In the end, isn’t it more damaging to the public to advocate buying expensive insurance you don’t need rather than prosecute a company for trying to sell solar panels?