IOP: expecting consistency between models and observations is an “error”

You see, the Climate models are not supposed to agree with reality.

The publisher of Environmental Research Letters today took the bizarre position that expecting consistency between models and observations is an “error”.

The publisher stated that the rejected Bengtsson manuscript (which, as I understand it) had discussed the important problem of the discrepancy between models and observations had “contained errors”.

But what were the supposed “errors”? Bengtsson’s “error” appears to be the idea that models should be consistent with observations, an idea that the reviewer disputed.

The reviewer stated that IPCC ranges in AR4 and AR5 are “not directly comparable to observation based intervals”:

That's right: the global warming climate change climate disruption models should not reflect what's actually happening.  Got it?

You're being Gaslighted by the Clime Syndicate.