Eric Winsberg (University of South Florida)
I explore a novel account of robustness according to which multiple lines of evidence for a hypothesis add cumulative support for the hypothesis whenever each one rules out a plausible alternative explanation. I show that we can make sense of a number of claims that multiple lines of evidence support climate hypotheses. First, I show how multiple lines of evidence, coming both from simulation outputs as well as from real world data, have worked to constrain our best estimates of equilibrium climate sensitivity. Second, I show that explanatory robustness provides the best account of the epistemic value of model agreement.
