Comment to DOI:10.1029/2006EO430010
[Comment on “On award to Crichton”] On the validity climate models
Article first published online: 26 JUN 2007
©2007. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.
Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
Volume 88, Issue 10, page 121, 6 March 2007
How to Cite
2007), [Comment on “On award to Crichton”] On the validity climate models, Eos Trans. AGU, 88(10), 121–121, doi:10.1029/2007EO100005., , , , , , and (
- Issue published online: 26 JUN 2007
- Article first published online: 26 JUN 2007
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.