Climate Change Models - Topic Citations

Every citation has two independent 0-100 scores. The source Reliability score rates the general reliability of the outlet itself, regardless of the specific claim, based on an eight-tier scale running from primary government and international scientific bodies (CDC, WHO, NASA, IPCC) at the top, through peer-reviewed journals, wire services, mainstream science journalism, and advocacy organizations, down to tertiary references like Wikipedia and unverifiable or absent sources at the bottom. The Accuracy score, by contrast, rates how well a specific citation supports topic statements — a citation from an excellent source can score low if misapplied or can score high if it precisely backs up topic statements.

Limitations and Uncertainty

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
  AR6 WG1 Chapter 7: The Earth's Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity (Forster, Storelvmo et al. 2021
  Reliability score: 98 | Accuracy score: 92
  
  
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
  AR6 WG1 Chapter 7: The Earth's Energy Budget,
  Reliability score: 98 | Accuracy score: 92
  
  
• Nature (Comment)
  Hausfather, Z., Marvel, K., Schmidt, G.A., Nielsen-Gammon, J.W. and Zelinka, M. (2022) Climate simulations: recognize th
  Reliability score: 90 | Accuracy score: 86
  
  
• Nature (Comment)
  Hausfather, Z., Marvel, K., Schmidt, G.A., Ni
  Reliability score: 90 | Accuracy score: 86
  
  

Accuracy and Reliability

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
  Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis - Summary for Policymakers (AR6 Working Group I)
  Reliability score: 98 | Accuracy score: 93
  
  
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
  Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Bas
  Reliability score: 98 | Accuracy score: 93
  
  
• Geophysical Research Letters (AGU / Wiley)
  Hausfather, Z., Drake, H.F., Abbott, T. and Schmidt, G.A. (2020) Evaluating the performance of past climate model projec
  Reliability score: 95 | Accuracy score: 96
  
  
• Geophysical Research Letters (AGU / Wiley)
  Hausfather, Z., Drake, H.F., Abbott, T. and S
  Reliability score: 95 | Accuracy score: 96
  
  
• NASA
  Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right (Jan 2020)
  Reliability score: 97 | Accuracy score: 94
  
  
• NASA
  Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Fut
  Reliability score: 97 | Accuracy score: 94
  
  

How Climate Models Work

• NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL)
  Climate Modeling
  Reliability score: 97 | Accuracy score: 93
  
  
• NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL)
  Climate Modeling
  Reliability score: 97 | Accuracy score: 93
  
  
• Geoscientific Model Development (Copernicus)
  Eyring, V. et al. (2016) Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and o
  Reliability score: 90 | Accuracy score: 88
  
  
• Geoscientific Model Development (Copernicus)
  Eyring, V. et al. (2016) Overview of the Coup
  Reliability score: 90 | Accuracy score: 88
  
  
• Carbon Brief
  Q&A: How do climate models work? (McSweeney & Hausfather, 15 Jan 2018)
  Reliability score: 80 | Accuracy score: 94
  
  
• Carbon Brief
  Q&A: How do climate models work? (McSweeney &
  Reliability score: 80 | Accuracy score: 94
  
  

Emissions Scenarios

• Carbon Brief
  Explainer: How 'Shared Socioeconomic Pathways' explore future climate change (Hausfather, 19 Apr 2018)
  Reliability score: 80 | Accuracy score: 94
  
  
• Carbon Brief
  Explainer: How 'Shared Socioeconomic Pathways
  Reliability score: 80 | Accuracy score: 94
  
  
• Geoscientific Model Development (Copernicus)
  O'Neill, B.C. et al. (2016) The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6
  Reliability score: 90 | Accuracy score: 92
  
  
• Geoscientific Model Development (Copernicus)
  O'Neill, B.C. et al. (2016) The Scenario Mode
  Reliability score: 90 | Accuracy score: 92