Are Bob Ellis climate posts controlled by climacs?

Since March 4th when I first posted about Bob Ellis and his ignorance of climate science, there has not been a post on his blog under his name dealing with climate. The obvious explanation therefore is that this blog has control over Bob Ellis and his misinformation campaign about climate. Right?

One of the posts from Ellis back on March 4 was about hydrothermal vents. He used that opportunity to repeat his belief that underwater volcanic activity must be a significant contributor to recent warming.

This is a good example of how intellectually vapid Ellis is in his rants against the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Let's look at some of what is wrong here...

First of all, for such geothermal activity to be causing warming that activity must be new or increasing. Perhaps Ellis assumes that, but it is not said.

Others have previously asserted that indeed such activity is increasing and causing ocean warming that ends up resulting in the current global warming. But simple back of the envelope calculations show that is not even close to reasonable. There is simply not enough heat released to register on a global scale.

The same reasoning helps illustrate why the sun does not explain the recent warming. The net radiative forcing since 1750 is about 10 times greater for CO2 than the sun. So it is like Ellis is looking at two fires and saying that even though one is putting out 10 times more heat, the other must be the one causing more warming because he prefers its type of fuel. No one says the sun cannot affect climate and cause warming, but a lot of scientific research has established that the sun does not explain the continuing warming of the last few decades.

It is not enough to say lava is hot, the sun is hot, CO2 is plant food, therefore underwater volcanoes and the sun but not CO2 cause warming. There needs to be not just handwaving and assertions but a feasible mechanism. Just because Ellis finds it "hard to believe that all this geothermal activity wouldn’t be melting the Arctic ice" does not mean that view has any validity at all. There is failure at step one with there being insufficient heat release to justify the belief.

My having a big head and declaring my posting is driving posting by Ellis has no support behind it. If there are future signs that Ellis has read my posts that debunk his nonsense and started demonstrating acceptance of the science, then there would be evidence to back up my boast. Similarly, no plausible mechanism has been proposed to support underwater volcanoes and the sun as explanations of current warming - in fact there is clear evidence those causes are not significant factors, and that explanations centered on human activities are strongly supported.