GREAT article. And I’ve had graduate level instruction in the “science.” In many respects its like the difference between weather forecasting (accurate within a narrow time range) and climate science (great looking backward, terrible looking forward [always misses the turns]).
I have masters’ degrees in both physics and business. It is my studied opinion that macroeconomics is more difficult to master than quantum mechanics. I admire anyone who is able to even think in any clear manner about all the factors involved in a macro system, and I bear no acrimony toward any who try, but fail to correctly predict future economics. I greatly admire Greenspan, Mises, and Friedman, especially, though it is now clear that Greenspan missed in his later actions for the Fed.
You are right: it is very much like “climate science” - and for much of the same reasons. The “models” simply can not model everything in a fine enough grid to be useful over important time horizons, and not all the factors are well enough understood for correct modeling. Some factors, though, are becoming much better understood with the study and insight of some of the greats.