Still not sure whether to take Mr. Hughes seriously, even though he echoes some of my points. His latest looks pretty confused at first reading but it's far from my expertise. Maybe Eli will have a look.
That all said, I am not one who says all is right with computational climatology.
My friend JL sends along an article by (not captain) James Quirk that does a good job outlining the quandary and some of the efforts toward a solution. Climate science is particularly backward in adopting these measures. There's a misperception that all GCMs solve the same problem that is understandable in the public but hard to account for within the field.
The article is called "Computational Science: Same Old Silence, Same Old Mistakes". It appears in a volume on AMR. It is behind a Springer firewall, so if you can't get the PDF note that Google will display a scan of it.
(Remember, rationally, the less we trust the models the more severe our policy constraints on modifying the system should be.)