Deniers are running out of puff

Update - see below for comments from the WUWT illiterati.

Anthony Watts, who doesn't even have bachelor degree, has promoted the silliest blurb from McIntyre (a wannabe climate scientist - failed) about "most" climate scientists being "high school teachers, if they were lucky".

By "climate scientist" one presumes he includes people with multiple qualifications from Yale, Oxford, U Cal. Berkeley, University College London, Wheaton College, MIT, Columbia and so on and so forth.

Climate scientists who have published widely in all the leading science journals including Science, Nature, Journal of Climate, PNAS etc etc.

And people who hold posts at leading universities and scientific research institutions.

The deniers really are running out of puff, aren't they.  Do they realise how truly dumb and ignorant that misplaced jibe makes them seem?  They probably think it makes them sound "clever".  Life members of the scientific illiterati.

Oh, I should have mentioned too, that most of Anthony's readers aren't familiar with Callendar's work.  He's running a poll on it.

Comments from the Illiterati

As if to underline the point that WUWT is purely for the illiterati, here are some comments (so you don't have to wade through them all yourself).

Luther Wu says - yes, really, this is a straight copy and paste:

August 4, 2013 at 8:59 am  Steve McIntyre made what appears to be a simple statement of the obvious, but is really a stinging indictment of the nature of political power in the free world.

Bill H says you don't need climate scientists or even high school teachers when you can have "any Jr High School kid":

August 4, 2013 at 9:30 am  Most do not understand the majority of the warming has already happened with regard to CO2. Above about 800ppm the effect is severely diminished and is the reason the earth survived bouts of 4,000 ppm while having both heat and glaciation at that level. This simple observation takes CO2 out of the running as the major driver of climate. And any Jr High School kid with basic science can figure this one out..

Who needs climate scientists when you have Richard111.  Is he arguing for global cooling by battery?

August 4, 2013 at 9:51 am  Basic logic from a layman. Every CO2 molecule in the atmosphere is on its own and being battered by some 2,499 plus other molecules. This battering is termed conduction and the CO2 molecule will be at whatever the local air temperature is, somewhere between say +15 to -50C depending on altitude up the air column. This means the CO2 molecule is too warm to readily absorb radiation in the 15 micron band from any source. But in that temperature range the CO2 will happily emit photons in the15 micron band. Just assume the molecule is at an altitude such that the earth horizon is 10 degrees below the molecule’s horizontal plane. Thus if the photon is emitted above the horizon the photon is probably lost to space and if below the horizon it could reach the surface. What are the number of upward directions as opposed to the downward directions? I make it 200 x 360 = 72,000 possible directions up and opposed to 160 x 360 = 57,600 downwards directions. Therefore there is a 25% better chance of the photon escaping to space than reaching the surface and that chance improves with the altitude. Once the molecule has emitted that photon that particular molecule will be at a temperature of -79C, not for long with all the battering but this is a cooling effect in the atmosphere.

All this clearly implies 15 micron radiation from CO2 in the atmosphere is certainly reaching the surface but it is not ‘back radiation’ and certainly less than claimed by CAGW adherents.

Well, tear my logic apart, I need to learn.

Or maybe milodonharlani's "homeostatic science" is your preference today:

August 4, 2013 at 10:15 am  Callendar’s graph shows a climate sensitivity of about 1.5 degree C for the doubling of CO2 concentration from three to six molecules per 10,000 air molecules. Sounds about right for water vapor pressure of 7.5mm of Hg, but I’ve never experimentally measured it myself. His finding is probably close to the actual that would be observed, since IMO positive & negative feedbacks tend to cancel each other out on the homeostatic earth.

Of course, if you try to make a comment that doesn't suit Anthony's denier meme, you're told off in no uncertain terms.  Ah no.  Did some more checking.  It looks as if Greg House is a slayer and Anthony doesn't like slayers:

August 4, 2013 at 10:31 am
[snip - sorry Greg, you've hijacked too many threads here at WUWT, and I already know what you have to say. Feel free to be as upset as you wish. - Anthony]

Greg House is surprised, he shouldn't be. Anthony doesn't permit dragon slayers at WUWT, except for some favoured people:

August 4, 2013 at 10:39 am  Really, comment deleted? Unbelievable.

REPLY: Like I said above, when snipping your comment, I’m not going to allow you to threadjack. Feel free to be as upset as you wish – Anthony

Not that Anthony doesn't allow/encourage people who argue for global cooling, like Bruce Cobb:

August 4, 2013 at 10:56 am  The rather close correlation is interesting, and one that Alarmists in particular should make note of. However, with cooling likely in coming decades, I would expect to see the correlation break down, with C02 continuing up.