At a recent event at Texas A&M’s Civitas Institute, Steve Koonin and other authors of the CWG report faced criticism from Andy Dessler, who pointed out flaws in their findings. Dessler accused them of cherry-picking data and ignoring existing literature. The presentation by Koonin was particularly contentious, as he claimed that “internal fluctuations” in climate models were not being adequately considered, leading to a misunderstanding of models’ discrepancies with observations.
Koonin cited Nicola Scaffetta’s work on climate model evaluation, which has faced significant criticism for its inaccuracies. He argued that internal variability has been overlooked by mainstream scientists in discussions about model discrepancies, but he provided no supporting evidence for this claim. Koonin’s argument that ignoring uncertainties in model comparisons is acceptable was labeled as scientifically irresponsible.
Critics emphasized the importance of using internal variability consistently in evaluating models, asserting that discrepancies should not invalidate model conclusions if observed data fall within expected ranges of variability. They also challenged Koonin’s assertion that finding one model consistent with observations validates the model, highlighting that a more nuanced understanding of model evaluations exists in the scientific community. Overall, the event underscored deep divisions in climate science perspectives.
Source link
