Rational argument is in short supply

DR Phillip Bratby’s letter (November 21) was a strange one. The “plethora of letters” were not “attacking him”, as he claimed, but pointing out the many flaws in his arguments. He seems to regard so many letters pointing out so many flaws as evidence that he is right. Very odd indeed!

Let’s remember some of his claims, such as a doubling of carbon dioxide concentration would have a negligible impact on the climate. That view disagrees with the vast majority of climate scientists on the planet, the IPCC, the UN, NASA, the Climate Change Committee, the UK Government, Uncle Tom Cobley and all.

He also failed to answer the point I made to him that his “water vapour” claim is a typical climate denier view. There is a long-established website to deal with such bogus and oft-repeated claims – Skeptical Science. You can find responses to this and many others on www. skepticalscience.com/argument.php. An extract from number 36 reads: “When something else causes a temperature increase (such as extra CO2 from fossil fuels), more water evaporates. Then, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, this additional water vapor causes the temperature to go up even further – a positive feedback.”

It’s both, not either/or, but the

CO2 causes the water vapour. Dr Bratby’s interpretation of the facts is faulty and misleading. Instead, he says that, as I am not a physicist with the experience he has, he will simply “stand by everything he said” and ignores the fact that I am merely quoting people who have vastly more experience and credibility than he has.

If he has evidence to the contrary, let’s see it. I think we can conclude Dr Bratby has run out of rational arguments.

Peter Scott Devon