Any of you folks here at CFI familiar with http://blog.hotwhopper.com?
Her description says it all:
Global warming and climate change. Eavesdropping on the deniosphere, its weird pseudo-science and crazy conspiracy whoppers.One of her missions is to keep an eye on the nonsense being posted over at Anthony Watt's "WattsUpWithThat" climate misinformation blog. {not to be mistaken with http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com :) } She does a wonderful job of exposing the nonsense that get's posted over there with insightful and humorous writing and I've been a fan of her's for a long time
Anthony, Watts Up With Those WUWT HotWhoppers? AN INDEX Saturday, March 30, 2013 http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2013/03/anthony-watts-up-with-those-wuwt.htmlI check up on her blog semi-regularly. Thoughts of a recent poster over here inspired me to it share this post. Since I perceive a certain resonance between him and Mr. Battig's approach and I thought some of you might enjoy it. Interesting stuff.
Raucous stupidity at WUWT with Charles G. Battig | by Sou | April 25, 2016 http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/raucus-stupidity-at-wuwt-with-charles-g.html#more While Anthony Watts is away there have been some articles at WUWT. The latest one was a copy of a letter by a conspiracy theorist called Charles G. Battig. He's appeared here before in an hysterical frame of mind. Charles retired some time ago to take up science denial. In his letter to the Editor (archived here), he starts by claiming that stupidity is not a handicap in politics. That may be the case or not. It's a handicap when trying to make points that contradict all known science, which is what Charles Battig does. He wrote:Behind these claims is the unsubstantiated assertion global climate change is driven primarily by manmade CO2, and that there is a magic CO2 knob to set climate to a Utopian level.First of all, science shows that global temperature, and hence climate, is controlled by the amount of atmospheric CO2. That's been known for a very long time. Back in the 1800s there were even newspaper articles in remote rural Australia, that informed people of this known fact. As for his "Utopian level", Charles just made that up. The fact is that for all of civilisation the global mean surface temperature varied only slowly and over a small range. We are now pushing it way above anything we as humans have experienced before, since we evolved. Whether or not Charles or anyone else regards civilisation as Utopia, we're moving out of it.Contributions to the greenhouse effect: water vapour 50%, clouds 25%, CO2 20%, other 5%Charles goes further and make an unsubstantiated, and wrong, assertion. It's been estimated that water vapour contributes about 50% to the greenhouse effect, clouds 25% and CO2 20%. That's just to the greenhouse effect itself. No warming. What adding CO2 does is make things warmer, which means there is more water vapour in the air, so the temperature rises from both the increased water vapour and the increased CO2. Both still make the same relative contribution to the effect at any point in time, and both contribute to an increase when they increase in the air. So Charles Battig was wrong when he wrote:The fact is atmospheric water vapor drives about 90 percent of the greenhouse gas effect. Scientists cannot differentiate natural from manmade climate change.That's two things wrong, one in each sentence. Atmospheric water vapour provides around half the greenhouse effect, not 90% of it. And scientists can differentiate what is contributing to the warming. That is, I'm now talking about the increase in temperature, not to the greenhouse effect itself at any point in time. The chart below shows what has forced the warming in recent decades:![]()
Radiative forcing of climate between 1750 and 2011. Bar chart for RF (hatched) and ERF (solid) for the period 1750–2011, where the total ERF is derived from Figure 8.16. Uncertainties (5–95% confidence range) are given for RF (dotted lines) and ERF (solid lines). Source: Figure 8.15: IPCC AR5 WG1continued . . .