Closing with Watts

The following is a short email sequence I shared with Anthony Watts last night over the defeat of his “challenge” to PSI and his subsequent experiment which he didn’t understand and with which he tried to ignore the answer to his challenge.  It follows on from some previous emails which I think I shared in a previous post in the comments section…


Hi Anthony,

So I just wanted to follow up to confirm to you that you didn’t perform an actual scientific analysis of your experiment and so you didn’t produce what you thought you did.  I understand that you don’t actually have scientific training, and so how you blankly interpreted your results is understandable.  Your experiment fully supported PSI’s and the Slayer position and the actual scientific analysis using physics equations has been published by us, and it fully supports the fact that there is no greenhouse effect.  Of course, we’ve also already published real-world data which demonstrated that in any case.

You have also confirmed that your source for science knowledge is Roy Spencer, and within that context you were unable to understand the results of your and his challenge to us to show our model.  We showed our model and referenced the real world data which proves there is no GHE, and we showed that Spencer’s model wasn’t what he thought it was and that ours was much more advanced that his.  This seems to escape you but your only justification for your dismissal of such scientific fact was that Spencer told you to think that.

I have something for you to think carefully about.  This isn’t a challenge, I am just providing you an analysis of what you’re doing.  It seems apparent that you lack actual scientific training and ability to mathematically analyse and understand physics with actual physics equations.  You rely on other people for what you should think.  You are being had, and are being used.  I don’t know if you know this, and are knowingly benefiting from it, but you’re being used.  Having a “highly read” climate blog doesn’t mean that you yourself actually know or are capable of doing science…problems of ego and personality and misplaced confidence can get in the way of clarity.

Anthony, in terms of mathematical physics, in terms of heat flow differential equations, in terms of reality and the laws of thermodynamics, to believe in the GHE, you literally, no joking, but literally, have to believe that the Earth is flat, and that the Sun is twice as far away as it actually is, and that there is no water on the surface of the Earth, etc.

So, you’re either an honest person who is being had, being used in fact, or you’re in on this scam.  How many articles will WUWT publish that indicate there is no GHE and there is no climate sensitivity to CO2 at all before you become cognizant of the fraud of the greenhouse effect?

PSI can quite factually demonstrate a model based on the actual and only heat-flow differential equations operating in real-time, that easily demonstrate there is no GHE.  It has already been done…we’ve already proved it, theoretically and with real-world observations.  Your recent challenge and your experiment have only bolstered and helped our position.

I need to tell you how you are being used, or how you are knowingly using yourself.  You are (knowingly or not) engaging in what is called “bracketing”.  Bracketing in the context of debate is when two parties, who appear to oppose each other (alarmists vs. skeptics), actually work together “behind the scenes” to establish the boundary conditions of what is considered “acceptable thought”.  The alarmist position (which ends with CO2 taxes and all that jazz) depends entirely on the greenhouse effect.  Without the greenhouse effect there is no alarmism, no taxes, no CO2 politics, etc.  A fully skeptical position would be to analyze the GHE for validity, which you discover it doesn’t actually have, and then alarmism and any related politics falls apart completely.  So, the bracketing comes in from people only appearing to be skeptics, who condition the boundaries of the debate so that the GHE is accepted and criticism of it is vilified with prejudice, and who then argue for a “low level” of climate sensitivity to alarmism.  The old question of “how much”.  A low level of sensitivity still supports CO2 taxation and some of the political goals attendant to that.  This was of course the original plan.  Thus, such skeptics and such a bounded phase space of criticism ends up fully supporting CO2 politics.

Such people who perform this role (on the supposedly “skeptic” side) have been accurately and brilliantly labelled as “luke warmists” by Joe Olson.

PSI is the only group acting like actual critical scientists.  We’ve shown in numerous ways why the greenhouse effect is a manufactured fraud designed to create alarmism and/or support CO2 politics.  It is very easy to do: all you have to do is demonstrate that the Earth isn’t flat and that sunshine isn’t cold, and then the GHE falls apart.

So, I’m not sure if you know you’re a “warmist” and you know what that implies and what you’re supporting, or, if you’re unknowingly being used by others to help maintain the “holy law” of protecting belief in the fraudulent greenhouse effect and shielding it from the slightest valid criticism.  Either way, it is not a position which you can win, or have won, and in fact have already lost, with your own challenges to us and your own experiments.  No amount of sophistry or shoddy science will ever actually make the Earth flat or the Sun twice as far away, etc.  The GHE will only ever be a cheap belief system based on lies for the purpose of lying.  PSI has much better, much more interesting, and actually valid mathematical physics that actually reproduces the climate without requiring a greenhouse effect.  The greenhouse models are based on, and create, fiction, in an entirely literal and matter-of-fact truth.



Anthony’s reply was his usual piss and vitriol, telling me that “people are laughing at you” (lol, oh no, really? my, I guess I better fall inline, right? …idiot), called me “juvenile”, said that Jeff Condon has already defeated the idea that the Earth is spherical with his own new challenge (related post), then got all pouty and said he doesn’t want to talk to me or any Slayer anymore (I guess not after all this huh? must be smarting a bit…), and said we have an “irreconcilable difference of opinion” on the what the Earth looks like.

My reply:


I didn’t expect you would understand and didn’t write it for us to agree over.  I was just letting you know what you are doing and what you’re in to.  You characterize it as a difference of opinion.  It is not a difference of opinion, it is understanding science and reality vs. not doing so, mathematics vs. desires.  I grant that your lot will likely win in emplacing this fraud given that most people don’t have the intelligence level required to comprehend it.

We answered Condon’s request.  He didn’t understand basic mathematics either.  And then he just lied and said we didn’t answer.  That’s how you guys operate, and you can get away with quite a bit doing that.  I just can’t figure out if such fellows know they’re lying, or if they’re just that daft about it all.

You have to really appreciate what damage is being done to science.  The greenhouse effect requires the Earth to be flat and the sun to be twice as far away…that is literally what its math does to the model.  And almost no one can understand it.  Even “experts” like Roy Spencer don’t know what a time-dependent model is.

I’m just telling you…you’re being had.  What I don’t know is if you’re in on it, but if you think [to quote] “You publish a simple experimental diagram, I replicate it exactly based on the parameters laid out by PSI’s essay, it doesn’t support your theory, and somehow I’m the one that didn’t do it correctly” is actually a defense that gets around the lack of an actual scientific analysis using physics equations and the law of conservation of energy (i.e. the 1st Law of Thermo) in what you did, then I think that perhaps you mean well, but have been had by others who are using you.

Your side doesn’t want to talk about the Earth being a sphere, and sunshine being hot, and the heat flow math and physics which model that in real time, and what they have to say.

In the future, you’ll be banning comments which reference a spherical Earth and hot sunshine.  Just think about that.

This isn’t about who’s laughing at who and making it that sort of a low-brow context indicates failure and it indicates your role in bracketing the discussion and helping to prevent skepticism.  It’s merely sad, what you guys are trying to do to people.  We’ve lost thousands of years of scientific development in going back to a flat Earth, in vilifying the thought of a spherical Earth.  It is just sad.

At this point, I think I must let you do this to yourself and to the people who want to fall for it.  But just remember that we know what you’re doing, we’ve identified your role and the role of the others, and we won’t go away.  We know how to prove the fraud and demonstrate it in your own words.  These lies have loose ends and they’ll become easier and easier to unravel as they have been.  Eventually, what you guys have attempted to do will be exposed.

Take care,


Gallery | This entry was posted in Fraud of the Greenhouse Effect and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Closing with Watts

  1. johnmarshall says:

    Watts trained as a meteorologist, I think, which is an observational science, ie. based on empirical data. Somewhere he lost his way.

  2. It certainly isn’t core physics!

  3. Pingback: Closing with Watts | Skeptics Chillin'

  4. johnosullivan says:

    Watts was a college drop out and never got any kind of degree.

  5. Bart says:

    Of Spencer and Watts and the rest of so called “Climate Science”……..

    Self-appointed guardians of the status quo!

    Intellectual materialists, conditioned into blindly and thoughtlessly upholding these structures (GHE!!!). Sheep who no longer need a sheep dog to control them, for they control each other by ostracizing those who step out of the norm.

    Courtesy of Zeitgeist!!!

    This is very clear in Watt’s “people are laughing at you” response. Also very clear in the “I’m not talking to you anymore” response. It’s very sad to see the level of thoughtlessness involved when they are able to ignore plain facts in favour of a structure that is clearly not based in reality. i.e. A flat earth with a -18degC sun!!!

    I believe they are simply too far gone and we should continue to feel sorry for them. I think they just need it explained to them several thousand times in order to match the amount of times they’ve been coerced into the GHE.

    Keep up the good work Joe and PSI! ……..and keep repeating the facts until everyone comes around.

  6. Simon Conway-Smith says:


    I wanted to leave this comment on Jeff Cordon’s blog in reply to one of Doug’s comments, but can’t remember my WordPress password (!)…


    What you have said here, almost again indirectly, is what I have been trying to say many times, is that the experiment’s ‘control’ must be “what would the heated object’s temperature be with PERECT insulation?”. All the posts by Jeff etc. assume the max temp of the object is attained when in a state of thermal equilibrium with an *arbitrary & unquantified* cooling component present. This is very wrong, as the presence of a cooling component does indeed reduce the object’s equilibrium temperature.

    What you have quite correctly said, albeit not explicitly, is that because the object is NOT at the maximum temp the heating component could drive it to, any other object that reduces the cooling component will cause the object’s temperature to rise.

    This ‘reduced cooling’ effect is then claimed by Jeff, Anthony, etc. to be ‘additional’ heating. It is not, and can never be.

  7. Peter Weggeman says:

    Joe, you are being too gracious answering these fools. They are harassing you. A sure sign that they fear your rational work.

  8. Derek Alker says:

    Joseph, you have confused me. You say to Anthony “The greenhouse effect requires the Earth to be flat and the sun to be twice as far away…that is literally what its math does to the model.”

    I thought GH “theory” mathematically states the earth is a flat disc, that is 4 times the distance from the sun earth actually is.

    GH “theory” shows a constant, or average input, at twice the distance between the earth and the sun the figures do not add up to me, for a flat disc, or a rotating oblate spheroid.

  9. Hi Derek,

    The reduction in solar flux intensity in the GHE models is a factor of four, which translates to an increase in distance by a factor of two (inverse square law).

  10. Derek Alker says:

    Thank you Joseph. Yes, obviously. I have been confusing increasing circumference without thinking of the increasing area (ie 2D rather than 3D). Doooh. Penny drops, many thanks. Twice the distance equals a quarter of the power.

  11. acckkii says:

    Reblogged this on acckkii.

  12. Allen Eltor says:

    Watts started a thread where he bashed Greg House as representing all Principia Scientifica members’ arguments. I question whether Watts who couldn’t get an engineering degree in eight years, when I got one in three, is of sound enough mind to discuss anything about it,

    except to peddle his ZeV2G0 electric cars.

    Watts is a classic greasy preacher/snake-oil salesman whose science involves belief in a magic mirror where 168 watts from a light bulb into the mirror, causes the mirror to return 324 watts to the light bulb, thus making the light bulb now a 390 watt bulb.

    And yep he’s peddling snake-oil with electric cars and his free bloatware so he can draw crowds to them.

    Anthony Watts is oozing the insaniac alarmist behavior those who don’t know he peddles cars using it, are puzzled by.

  13. Allen Eltor says:

    Watts chose money over truth. It’s not like it’s a crime, he just got caught.

    And now he can hardly believe the brutal bludgeonings he’s taking every single day as yet another generation turns 18 years old and does papers on this or that, and discover what a wacked out belief GHGE really is,

    and who’s peddling it.

  14. He’s completely out to lunch and checked out. Just think of how much these people hate discussing a spherical rotating earth! They hate the idea! lol

  15. Allen Eltor says:

    I told him in his new anti-PSI thread that he and the hicks he dredged up claiming they believe in that Magic Gas Being a Heater tripe were destined for failure from the beginning, and deserved what they got when they were revealed magic power endorsing hillbillies with people on his (Watts’) own pages swearing there were ‘magical back and forth-isms’ going on when entropic forces were leveling out that were outright claimed to be beyond instruments, beyond mathematics even, to bound: and that any group of people who were found with those in their midst were bound to be ridiculously embarrassed.

    I told him he tried to claim he believed some people were going to come up with a heating component to a frigid gas bath, refrigerated by phase change gas water, while the earth’s called ‘the blue planet’ due to the oceanic basins being about ten thousand feet deep in that very same liquified-it’s-so-frigid, liquid, refrigerant.

    He snipped it saying it was stupid and condescending, so I said it again.

    He’s a con man peddling alarmism over alarmism, so he can thin out the herd and let through the crowd who want to buy an electric car from him. He sells electric freakin cars for goodness’ sake, using free writing from whoever he can get to write at an Area51/Bigfoot/A.W.G. site, and

    I post there as Richard Vada:

    Richard Vada says:
    July 22, 2013 at 4:07 am

    The fact of the matter is you haven’t ever moved a meter with your pretend effect,
    and there’s no name for that effect in the literature of history except as been claimed by cranks to move weather, and eventually climate.

    You’re not going to move a meter with the magic gas effect because there is no heating component to a miles deep frigid, refrigerated, gas bath. The fact the earth’s covered with ten thousand feet of refrigerant isn’t going to help your case.

    You who believed there would one day be found an effect measurable have been proven wrong in your guess which way an instrument would move time, after time.
    Richard Vada says:
    July 22, 2013 at 4:21 am

    The ocean basins cover the earth about 55 or something percent. They kick back blue light the most energetic end of the spectrum.

    The earth’s “the blue planet” because of it.

    You’re not going to find an instrument class which reveals a warming effect due to the presence of the gas, water, half the globe covered in oceanic basins of:

    Even saying you think maybe reveals something’s seriously up with what leads you to claim you believe it. The atmosphere’s a frigid gas bath, refrigerated, with phase change action, of water.

    The refrigerant and the tiny trace of CO2 aren’t going to be found, ‘warming’ anything. No matter how many years people spend milking the grant/publicity that comes from insisting it will.”

    Anthony Watts is a snake-oil peddler who is trying to ride alarmism into personal fame and enhanced sales of his Zev2go electric cars.
    I want to point out something to all you young people who are coming in on the tail end of all this seeing Watts being nothing more than another bullshooter in a cheap suit: WHEN PEOPLE SEEM ALARMED YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THEM ANONYMOUSLY, YOU KNOW YOU HAVE a PROBLEM because IF THEY DON’T LIKE THE MESSENGERS who CARRY a MESSAGE then they NEED to be able

    You don’t necessarily have to let some chump challenge you to expose yourself to his hillbilly friends deciding they’ll mob your privacy till there’s too many of them to arrest, if they’re already involved in shady government dealings, shady business, whatever: would you sign up at sites where they ‘insisted’ you give them your personal snail mail address or no-go?

    Same principle. Do not be intimidated by con men/government bullshit projectors who claim if you don’t reveal precisely who you are, they won’t deal with you. This is the oldest trick in the book. Simply talk you into laying down any defense you have to their crap.

    Don’t ever spend your life’s fortune on some argument online unless you really do, really have to. Because that a$$wipe can and will lose his mind and simply make you ashamed he’s aware you exist and, share similar d.n.a. with him.

    Anthony Watts is one of those who does his dead level best to project honesty, when really, he’s an alarmist and a liar who claims in EIGHT YEARS of electrical or electronic or whatever engineering school he NEVER CAME ACROSS the CONCEPT you can’t generate a WARMING component from the REFRIGERANT in a REFRIGERATOR.

    To ANTHONY WATTS that sounds STUPID or CONDESCENDING because it’s what I told him, when I told him the Dragon Slayer people told him,
    he’d never make that refrigerant into a heating element of a giant magic heater,
    not once,
    not ever.
    And I meant that.
    Not ever.

    And all you have to do is think about that for about fifteen seconds to see: those hicks are some seriously disordered people to think that and if they really go about pretending they do, they’re making money from claiming it.

  16. Allen Eltor says:

    Ah the link to at least, the part where I told him off the second time.

  17. Oh he doesn’t like being condescended to eh? Coming from Watts…lol. Poor little man.

  18. Myrrh says:

    Anthony often makes the statement, I paraphrase, ‘I believe in the Greenhouse Effect’, but he ends up censoring any posts which challenge him, this consensus view, to offer proof.

    There is always the general hand waving in the direction of ‘Ahrennius, Fourier, Tyndall’ saying they proved it, but no examination of what they said and what level of understanding they had actually reached – this was a long time ago at the very beginning of these great science leaps, and we have moved on since then building on these.. They also claim there a tons of experiments from the last century to prove the GHE, but when requested none is ever fetched, the usual response is silence.

    I also cannot work out if Anthony is a shill or an unwitting dupe.., it really does not matter in the scheme of things because the effect is the same, censorship of any posts which get too close to generating real discussion on the science fraud of Greenhouse Effect concept itself.

    His ‘mentors’, Spencer and Monckton are particularly devious in promoting the idea that they are engaged in open discussion of the science and against the censorship prevalent in the ‘global warming’ protagonists camp, but hypocritically censor any questioning the ‘consensus’ that there is such a thing as the Greenhouse Effect.

    Monckton wanted me confined to a ghetto on WUWT when I challenged him to provide physical proof of the GHE, and this in a discussion were he was, in his own inimitable style, condemning ‘appeals to authority as proof’ in a talk to a bunch of university students.

    It does appear that this mindset is controlled opposition – a while back there was a slew of posts of Anthony’s ilk presenting themselves as ‘not the deniers of GHE but only arguing sensitivity’, and this is now mainstream. Springer wrote a post on it, and, we had the ridiculous scenario of some of these crying crocodile tears bewailing the ‘unfair categorisation of them as deniers with its association of Holocaust’. They even stole that from us who challenge the concept..

    It is very clever, but who the dupes and who the savvy players would take far too much investigation and would have the same effect as this controlled opposition’s aim – to detract from the arguments against the GHE.

    I have had allowed through two posts on Jo Nova’s site, I personally do not think she censors but that one or more of her mods do, the first is a simple direct challenge against the physics and the second showing the sleight of hand science fraud premise on which the concept is built.
    Post 7 and 41

    Typo in post 7, I typed 1954 when it should have been 1956, as in the quote.

    What I have found fascinating is the clever sleights of hand in the physics and in the rebuttal memes this, what I’ve taken to calling AGWScienceFiction, produces. It really is very simple trickery but only if one knows the real physics – which is why they have to be so vociferous in preventing concentrated analysis.

    It could only have been put together by someone/some who knew real physics very well indeed. It creates a whole new ‘science fantasy’ world, impossible in the real physical world. And this is what really worries me, this has dumbed down basic science, and I do mean basic, I’m not a scientist, for this generation and they are teaching it at university level to the next.

    For example, these now cannot understand the difference in photovoltaic and thermal panels in their use of the different radiant light and heat from the Sun – they will be able to construct such, but unable to come up with the products from their own fake fisics if they had to start from scratch.

    And it will appear like magic or commercial fraud to them that glass and film for windows are produced to stop radiant heat from the Sun entering while maximising entry of visible light in order to keep rooms cool and save on air conditioning costs.. If they ever bothered to look at the claims and compare it with their comic cartoon energy budget.

    It really is a topsy turvy world they, whoever they are, created.

  19. Myrrh says:

    Re the

    Gary Hdladik shows the confusion about real world downwelling measurements of the GHE energy budget comic cartoon, KT97 and ilk.

    By taking out the direct radiant heat from the Sun, aka longwave infrared, they use these real world measurements to claim “backradiation from the atmosphere by greenhouse gases”.

    I’ve just posted on this aspect on the cold Sun here:

    But as with the 2nd law “net” argument, they close it down so readers don’t have a chance to think about it and they’ve perfected the equivalent of “deniers” for shutting down any real discussion, “slayers”..

    Joel used to argue the “net” as Tim is doing here, he never came back with an answer when I asked what mechanism was in place to change the flow of cold to hot to give a net hot to cold.

    I don’t see the explanation memes around so much now, but I was told by someone who extrapolated from this net that ‘an eskimo could leave a chunk of meat in his igloo to go out hunting for a few hours and when he returned his dinner will have been cooked by “backradiation of heat flowing from cold to hot”.

  20. I think Anthony has shown himself to be an unwitting dupe. Just look at what he did with the light bulb. And then his response. And his challenge, which he then ignored. Etc. He is completely clueless scientifically and simply goes along with what his controllers (Spencer, Brown, etc) direct him to.

    They will not discuss a real-time model of the system, they will not discuss a non-averaged value for the solar insolation, they will not discuss the latent heat of liquid water barrier, they will not discuss a round spherical rotating Earth, they will not discuss the TOA energy boundary conditions as a function of latitude, etc. Ergo, they are purposefully hiding the truth and/or are idiot. The solution to Napoleon’s maxim to not confuse stupidity for malice is that stupidity IS malicious, and maliciousness IS stupid. The Watts Gang are both malicious and stupid.

  21. Allen Eltor says:

    Anthony Watts is a shill. He worked in television. He’s not interested in intellectual truths, He’s a lying sack of shit in a cheap suit, passing himself off as an honest man.

    Everybody knows there’s no way you can extract a cooling signal from a frigid, refrigerated bath’s refrigerant. Even his stupid ass. He’s just evil. He figured out to stay relevant in the news he HAD to SAY HE BELIEVES in the MAGIC GAS with the MAGIC BACKERDISMS.

    So he did. I’m not saying a girl who gives it up for money isn’t capable of having SOME respect, not at all. She’s gotta get through the night somehow. What WATTS is doing is trying to REVIVE the ALARMISM/PUBLICITY by ASSASSINATING MORE HONEST MEN’S CHARACTER.

    He knows P.R.E.C.I.S.E.L.Y. what he’s doing: he simply doesn’t care about intellectual honesty.

    He doesn’t care. He’s a laughing Euro/white man whose sole joy is amassing personal money and FAME, that he can leverage to power.

    N.E.V.E.R: I mean, E.V.E.R. accuse someone in media of being naive. YOU CAN’T STAY in the MEDIA FIELD and BE NAIVE.

    He knows E.X.A.C.T.L.Y. what he’s doing.

  22. Allen Eltor says:

    The reason he mentioned the Slayers is so he can draw ECO-WACKOS TO HIS SITE so HE CAN SELL THEM ELECTRIC CARS as they get FAMILIAR with ‘HONEST TONY’ and his ‘MIDDLE OF THE ROAD’ approach of ‘SAY ANYTHING I HAVE TO, to STAY RELEVANT in MEDIA and POLITICS so $$$M.O.N.E.Y.$$$ keeps COMING from it.

    It is EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL to him to have ECO-WACKOS coming to his SITE. They’re the MAIN ones who



    F.R.E.E. MEDIA for his BRAND polishing site: Watts Up With That.

    His BRAND isn’t the ZEV2GO cars, that’s just one of his ways of PROFITING from the ALARMISM.

    His brand is his NAME. That’s why he JEALOUSLY KEEPS ALL MENTION of his



  23. cassidy421 says:

    Watts is a AMS certified meteorologist. AMS certification requires a university/college degree in meteorology or equivalent. His AMS seal# is posted on the AMS Television Seal Holders website.

    Just now checked out your website & haven’t looked at links yet.
    BS Chem, quantum physics and quantum physics of photochemical rx, no astrophysics.

  24. Too bad he can’t actually cogitate or think like a true scientist, or that he’d ever taken some real physics courses.

  25. Samm Simpson says:

    Reblogged this on mediaispropaganda and commented:
    The Greenhouse Effect is a fraud – as Joe Postma so eloquently explains to global warming alarmist Anthony Watts.

  26. Samm Simpson says:

    marvelous post, Joe. thank you for your integrity

  27. Pingback: Anthony Watts: Loser | Climate of Sophistry

  28. Pingback: How Anthony Watts and Chrisopher Monckton Helped Prove Slayer Rationalism | Climate of Sophistry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s