Per the editorial:

"She apparently believes the uncertainty in such models stems from uncertainty about how much CO2 in the future will be released.

“The uncertainties that people talk about . . . are predicated on the policy choices we make,” namely the “inputs” of future CO2.

No, they aren’t. The whole purpose of a climate model is to estimate warming from a given input of CO2."

Now the author is just flat out lying, the very definition of a General Circulation Model (or Global Climate Model) is a numerical simulation of geophysical fluid dynamics based on known physics and chemistry. 

In any case the editorial proves nothing except that the author knows how to cherry pick.