We object to contributor Kevin Corbett's assertions, in his article “On award to Crichton” (Eos, 87(43), 464, 2006), that “Too often now, models are taken as data and their results taken as fact, when the accuracy of the models in predicting even short-term effects is poor and the fundamental validity for most climate models is opaque…” Corbett cites (among other references) our Eos article “Coupled climate model appraisal: A benchmark for future studies” [Phillips et al, 2006], implying that our findings support his remarks. In fact, our evaluation of model simulations relative to observational data leads us to very different conclusions.