If it is plausible that one flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil might trigger a tornado in Texas, then so, too, is the notion of climate change. Indeed, that the population growth of mankind should have no impact upon climate (and many other things besides) is highly implausible. However, this provides no rationale for climate action. The scientific basis for climate forecasts (as for complex system forecasts in general) is likely to remain elusive. As meteorologists resist extending their forecasts beyond ten-days, what basis could there be for giving credibility to thirty, forty and fifty-year climate forecasts? So, the charge of climate change denial can be robustly refuted; but a denial of ‘science’ in climate forecasts is entirely rational. Yet, even if the science, the models, the predictions and the cost estimates of low-carbon remedies were reliable, the necessary resources could be deployed to better effect upon known remedies for current human suffering. So let’s stop the nonsense.