Do you think that in the same way that the Solanki et al paper on solar sunspot reconstructions had a specific statement that their results did not contradict ideas of strong greenhouse warming in recent decades, this (the fact that climate sensitivity projections are not best estimates of possible future actual temperature increases) should be clearly noted in media releases put out by scientists when
reporting climate sensitivity studies?
Forest 2006, along with several
other climate sensitivity studies, used simulations by the MIT 2D model of zonal surface and upper - air temperatures and global deep - ocean temperature, the upper - air data being least influential.
So various of the shortcomings of such
climate sensitivity studies that you allude to also apply to many detection and attribution studies, as you no doubt appreciate, although problems with biased Bayesian inference apply only to such climate sensitivity studies.
Climate sensitivity studies of the Greenland Ice Sheet using satellite AVHRR, SMMR, SSM / I and in situ data.