# Why don't climate change deniers publish? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 14, 2014, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811 "2014-01-14T20:28:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2014, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/141 "2014-01-20T18:53:21Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > The problem is, when people make things up, like “Water vapor is a feedback and not a forcing”, there isn’t any evidence that such a statement exists, except where somebody made it up. > > You won’t find it [in a textbook](https://www.google.com/#q=%22Water+vapor+is+a+feedback+and+not+a+forcing%22), or [any scientific paper](http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Water+vapor+is+a+feedback+and+not+a+forcing%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C10&as_sdtp=), or even on a real climate science page. > > Instead you get blogs, where people say all kinds of stupid things, but don’t back it up with science. Evidence. Note that the 9 hits are all blogs. Once again, Google vomiting does not make a good argument. > **[RealClimate: Water vapour: feedback or forcing?](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/water-vapour-feedback-or-forcing/)** > > RealClimate: Whenever three or more contrarians are gathered together, one will inevitably claim that water vapour is being unjustly neglected by 'IPCC' scientists. "Why isn't water vapour acknowledged as a greenhouse gas?", "Why does anyone even... > [@](#): > > Whenever three or more contrarians are gathered together, one will inevitably claim that water vapour is being unjustly neglected by ‘IPCC’ scientists. “Why isn’t water vapour acknowledged as a greenhouse gas?”, “Why does anyone even care about the other greenhouse gases since water vapour is 98% of the effect?”, “Why isn’t water vapour included in climate models?”, “Why isn’t included on the forcings bar charts?” etc. Any mainstream scientist present will trot out the standard response that water vapour is indeed an important greenhouse gas, it is included in all climate models, but it is a feedback and not a forcing. From personal experience, I am aware that these distinctions are not clear to many, and so here is a more in-depth response (see also this other attempt). > [@](#): > > While water vapour is indeed the most important greenhouse gas, the issue that makes it a feedback (rather than a forcing) is the relatively short residence time for water in the atmosphere (around 10 days). To demonstrate how quickly water reacts, I did a GCM experiment where I removed all the water in the atmosphere and waited to see how quickly it would fill up again (through evaporation from the ocean) . The result is shown in the figure. It’s not a very exciting graph because the atmosphere fills up very quickly. At Day 0 there is zero water, but after only 14 days, the water is back to 90% of its normal value, and after 50 days it’s back to within 1%. That’s less than 3 months. Compared to the residence time for perturbations to CO2 (decades to centuries) or CH4 (a decade), this is a really short time. Only the stratosphere is dry enough and with a long enough residence time (a few years) for the small anthropogenic inputs to be important but even there there are reports that it is not helping the contrarians either. > **[NOAA CSL: 2013 News & Events: Water vapor in the upper atmosphere...](https://csl.noaa.gov/news/2013/144_0930.html)** > > NOAA CSL 2013 News & Events: Archives of news, features, highlights, meetings, events, workshops, symposiums > [@](#): > > A new study shows that water vapor high overhead and the temperature at the Earth’s surface are linked in a climate feedback loop – and gives the first estimate of the size of the effect. > > “Water vapor in the stratosphere increases in tandem with increases in the Earth’s surface temperature,” said coauthor Sean Davis, a CIRES scientist at CSD. “Because water vapor is a greenhouse gas, this generates additional warming. We show that this feedback loop could be about 10% of the climate warming from all greenhouse gases.” > > The new study “Stratospheric water vapor feedback,” published online September 30 in the prestigious journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, quantifies the magnitude of the stratospheric water vapor feedback for the first time, making use of satellite observations and a climate model. > > “While it’s not really surprising that this process is going on, we were surprised at how important the process is for our climate system,” said lead author Andrew Dessler, an atmospheric sciences professor at Texas A&M University and CIRES Visiting Fellow at CSD this summer. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2014, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/142 "2014-01-20T19:03:33Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > The problem is, when people make things up, like “Water vapor is a feedback and not a forcing”, there isn’t any evidence that such a statement exists, except where somebody made it up. > > You won’t find it [in a textbook](https://www.google.com/#q=%22Water+vapor+is+a+feedback+and+not+a+forcing%22), or [any scientific paper](http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Water+vapor+is+a+feedback+and+not+a+forcing%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C10&as_sdtp=), or even on a real climate science page. Really? [Here are 291,000 scientific papers on water vapor feedback](http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=water+vapor+feedback&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=EW_dUqbeE-qK2gXr0oGgCg&ved=0CCYQgQMwAA). The problem with your original Google search is that in the statement “water vapor is a feedback loop” the word “loop” is redundant. Water vapor is a feedback. Period. Of course water vapor is a GHG. No one disputes that. Just like no one in the legitimate scientific community disputes that it’s a feedback of rising temperatures. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2014, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/143 "2014-01-20T19:20:36Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > You won’t find it in a textbook LOL … in addition to the 291,000 scientific papers on water vapor **feedback** , I’m also happy to quote a textbook… > [@](#): > > In rough terms, the physics of the water vapor feedback is very simple. Warmer air can hold more water vapor. In a warmer climate, the troposphere will have the potential to hold larger concentrations of water vapor. Water vapor is an effective greenhouse gas (the most important greenhouse gas in the climatological greenhouse effect), and thus it can add greatly to the initial warming if it increases. Figure 6.5 shows this process. Courtesy of “Climate Change and Climate Modeling”, J. Neelin, Cambridge University Press, 2011. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2014, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/144 "2014-01-20T19:22:44Z")
He’ll follow that statement around the Horn, and around the Norway maelstrom, and around perdition’s flames before he will give it up. Arr 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Steely\_Dan\_Fan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de053/32.png) [@Steely\_Dan\_Fan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steely_Dan_Fan)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2014, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/145 "2014-01-20T19:27:07Z")
Seriously, climate-change denial is like anti-vaccine propaganda. Neither constitutes protected speech, because protected speech does not include killing people. Both are, at best, criminally-negligent homicide. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2014, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/146 "2014-01-20T19:51:12Z")
> [@dasmoocher](#): > > > [@watchwolf49](#): > > > > Perhaps I go to far in stating that they are doing this by intent, but it doesn’t matter, human’s only hope of survival is killing every last whale. > > Have we not learned anything from _Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home_? Nice catch, I’ve always wondered if there was a connection to the “Nuke the Whales” campaign in that movie. I found a more contemporary statement of principle, the language is a little rough and it is humorous, so two-click rule applied: [Nuke the Whales !!!](http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Why%3F:Nuke_the_whales) … and they eat photoplankton. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/147 "2014-02-18T13:35:52Z")
> [@Steely\_Dan\_Fan](#): > > Seriously, climate-change denial is like anti-vaccine propaganda. Neither constitutes protected speech, because protected speech does not include killing people. > > Both are, at best, criminally-negligent homicide. There you have it dopers. Whatever the undefined “climate-change denial” is, it’s exactly like killing people. ---
**Author:** ![ThisUsernameIsForbidden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b4bc9f/32.png) [@ThisUsernameIsForbidden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThisUsernameIsForbidden)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/148 "2014-02-18T14:09:59Z")
> [@](#): > > It’s not complicated. Vanity journals will publish anything. Legitimate journals publish based in general on two criteria: research relevance, and quality. If only it were so. PopSci journals publish based on what their readership is likely to read, legitimate journals publish based on author reputation. Climate change denier “scientists” don’t have a reputation within the academic research community. They are two separate groups of “scientists”; one with academic research cred and the other with popular folk science cred and contributions from groups who would like to perpetuate the idea that there is nothing to worry about polluting the air and water on the planet. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/149 "2014-02-18T14:17:52Z")
It’s funny, because most of the actual scientists who are critical of the fear mongering and pseudo-science of climate change, are very concerned about their world and pollution. The alarmists wants to paint all “enemies” with a wide tar brush. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/150 "2014-02-18T14:21:21Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > It’s funny, because most of the actual scientists who are critical of the fear mongering and pseudo-science of climate change, are very concerned about their world and pollution. The alarmists wants to paint all “enemies” with a wide tar brush. …says the man painting all “enemies” with a wide tar brush. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/151 "2014-02-18T14:24:35Z")
I have no enemies. Just friends who haven’t realized how right I am. Yet. No seriously, someday we will be the best of friends. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/152 "2014-02-18T14:26:35Z")
Yeah, that’s not creepy _at all_. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/153 "2014-02-18T15:13:34Z")
It is actually. I was channeling Bart. Relax, it’s humor where I come from. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/154 "2014-02-18T15:14:45Z")
Meanwhile > [@FXMastermind](#): > > There you have it dopers. Whatever the undefined “climate-change denial” is, it’s exactly like killing people. Do you agree with that? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/155 "2014-02-18T15:19:55Z")
It’s an extreme interpretation of an imperfect analogy. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/156 "2014-02-18T15:48:17Z")
Way to avoid answering ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/157 "2014-02-18T16:34:15Z")
Sorry - I forgot you only like answers simple enough for you to comprehend. Nonetheless, it’s both an answer and an accurate one. I neither wholly agree nor wholly disagree with the statement you present, for the reason I stated. I suppose if you require a binary response I’ll say “disagree” due to the use of the word “exactly”, noting that that was added in your paraphrase of the original. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/158 "2014-02-18T17:25:15Z")
Let’s make it simple for you. Do you agree that “Climate-change denial is, at best, criminally-negligent homicide.”? Do you agree wth the following? > [@Steely\_Dan\_Fan](#): > > Seriously, climate-change denial is like anti-vaccine propaganda. How about this? > [@Steely\_Dan\_Fan](#): > > Neither constitutes protected speech, because protected speech does not include killing people. > > Both are, at best, criminally-negligent homicide. It’s a straight up set of questions. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811/159 "2014-02-18T17:26:17Z")
Because if you agree, you are saying free speech should be stifled, and prison time is mandated for anyone who is “a climate denier”. You think that is a sane statement? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-climate-change-deniers-publish/678811.md?page=7)