The study that the Paris Accord is based on is junk, says "Data Science, Climate and Satellites Consultant" John J. Bates, a whistle-blower who talked to The Daily Mail. That the NOAA rushed it out, in violation of their own rules, and that world leaders blindly accepted it says volumes about the "science is settled." Now the NOAA is going to revise it all, downwards, and cover up all their research leading up to the Karl study.
It seems that the data was deliberately manipulated to "end the pause" which has lasted some 18 years so far. Flawed data, a program in its 'Alpha' build having so many bugs it was completely unreliable, and a political motivation to get a study out, ANY study, that showed AGW was rapidly advancing, in order to support the Paris meeting. That's not science, that's politics.
[Just to give this Daily Mail article some depth, Popular Mechanics just published an article that refutes these claims. -- Fancylad]