Missing news: Problems with climate models

Roger Pielke Snr has an interesting post that will no doubt never be covered by the ABC's Science unit. It's on continuing problems with the skill of climate models, and based on a discussion of the work of Demetris Koutoyiannis.

From Koutsoyiannis et al 2011

“….we tested whether the model outputs are consistent with reality (which reflects the entire variability, due to combined natural and anthropogenic effects). Our results extend Huard’s statements further. Specifically, we show that, climate models are not only unable to predict the variability of climate, but they are also unable to reproduce even the means of temperature and rainfall in the past. For example, as we stated in our paper, “In some [models], the annual mean temperature of the USA is overestimated by about 4–5◦C and the annual precipitation by about 300–400 mm”.

Roger comments:
This Comment/Reply illustrates, in my view, the continued pressure on Editors not to publish papers that conflict with the IPCC perspective of the climate system and the ability of global climate models to provide skillful predictions decades into the future. Instead of showing in a quantifiable manner any flaws in the work by Demetris Koutsoyiannis and colleages, Huard 2011 resorts to semantics and criticisms of the review process. Whenever authors resort to such arguments, it illustrates that they cannot refute the substance of the research study.

See the whole post HERE.

Missing Voices: Demetris Koutsoyiannis

Tony Jones, presenter of the ABC's Lateline and Q and A current affairs programs, claims to have interviewed all the main scientists sceptical of the IPCC consensus. It appears he has not spoken with Demetris Koutsoyiannis, Professor in Hydrology and Analysis of Hydrosystems, and Head of the Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering of the National Technical University of Athens. Winner of the prestigious Henry Darcy Medal for 2009. For some reason ABC News, ABC Online and the Science Show have steadfastly refused to cover the research of Professor Koutsoyiannis. Another clear example of the devastating influence that ABC's Groupthink culture is having on the ABC's credibility.
Can we please see ABC interview Professor Koutsoyiannis, whose output is prolific and includes the following peer reviewed papers:

D. KOUTSOYIANNIS, A. EFSTRATIADIS, N. MAMASSIS & A. CHRISTOFIDES “On the credibility of climate predictions” Hydrological Sciences–Journal–des Sciences Hydrologiques, 53 (2008).

Abstract “Geographically distributed predictions of future climate, obtained through climate models, are widely used in hydrology and many other disciplines, typically without assessing their reliability. Here we compare the output of various models to temperature and precipitation observations from eight stations with long (over 100 years) records from around the globe. The results show that models perform poorly, even at a climatic (30-year) scale. Thus local model projections cannot be credible, whereas a common argument that models can perform better at larger spatial scales is unsupported.”

“In essence, they found that climate models have no predictive value.”
A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data
G. G. Anagnostopoulos; D. Koutsoyiannis; A. Christofides; A. Efstratiadis; N. Mamassis 
 Hydrological Sciences Journal, 2150-3435, Volume 55, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 1094 – 1110
Abstract
We compare the output of various climate models to temperature and precipitation observations at 55 points around the globe. We also spatially aggregate model output and observations over the contiguous USA using data from 70 stations, and we perform comparison at several temporal scales, including a climatic (30-year) scale. Besides confirming the findings of a previous assessment study that model projections at point scale are poor, results show that the spatially integrated projections are also poor. 

On the website of another voice missing from the ABC, Roger Pielke Snr, Prof. Koutsoyiannis wrote the following.
“A common argument in favour of the political orientation of the IPCC is that its aims are good for humanity and the natural environment and that reducing emissions of greenhouse gases will be beneficial for the planet, regardless of the ultimate validity of the IPCC model predictions. However, we believe that science is a process for the pursuit of truth and that fidelity to this system should not be affected by other aims. History shows that such distractions can be detrimental to science.” 
Why wouldn't this view be of interest to ABC's audience?