Mark Zelinka

Research Scientist, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Expertise: Cloud feedbacks, Climate sensitivity, Radiative forcing



 hypothesis  Orcid ID

hypothesis   Hypothesis handle: mzelinka

Qualifying publication(s): see criteria





Article in The Guardian misleads readers about sensitivity of climate models by narrowly focusing on single study

in The Guardian, by Jonathan Watts

— 18 Jun 2020

"The article correctly reports that the most recent versions of some climate models estimate more warming for a given increase in CO2 concentrations. It is also correct in highligh..

Financial Post commentary misleads about warming effect of greenhouse gas emissions by cherry-picking studies

in Financial Post, by Ross McKitrick

— 22 Jun 2018

"This article selectively cherry-picks studies showing low climate sensitivity, leaving out whole lines of evidence (e.g. paleoclimate studies) that agree with the sensitivity esti..

Analysis of “Why are climate-change models so flawed? Because climate science is so incomplete”

in The Boston Globe, by Jeff Jacoby

— 16 Mar 2017

"The facts given by the author regarding the skills of climate models and the state of the art are mostly wrong. The most important processes are not understood by the author and h..


Climate sensitivity estimate given in Heartland Institute’s report is misleading

Doubling the concentration of atmospheric CO2 from its pre-industrial level, in the absence of other forcings and feedbacks, would likely cause a warming of ~0.3°C to 1.1°C

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter and S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute

Published: 02 May 2017


Boston Globe column claims that climate models have consistently failed based on no evidence

Climate projections using models based on it [the water vapor feedback] have consistently failed

SOURCE: Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe

Published: 16 Mar 2017