If so, then I've got some swampland to sell you. An unvalidated model is little more than a hypothesis that runs on a computer. The scientific process requires that a hypothesis be tested against the known facts before it is accepted as anything more than an educated guess.

I'm not at all opposed to computer models. They can be valuable tools when the fundamental processes are understood and they've proven themselves against the real world. Until they reach that level of maturity, they're nothing more than a SWAG. Sorry, but I don't put much faith in SWAGs. Show me a validated climate computer model and we can discuss what it predicts. As a software engineer, I can make a model to "predict" just about anything I want. That doesn't mean the model is any good, though.