Abstract
Equilibrium climate sensitivity - ECS - is easily-understood, has been studied for over 150 years and is therefore appealing as a metric for communication of climate model results. In this work I argue that ECS is not a good metric for comparing different climate models. Via brief examples concerning the Pliocene epoch and the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum , I further argue that models which produce temperatures towards the higher end of model intercomparisons are useful in spite of recent studies concluding that these models are 'too hot'. I hope that this brief manuscript generates discussion on how to prioritise the consideration of more useful, and potentially novel, ways of comparing climate models going forward.