I got as far as this bit.
my responses are in UPPER CASE MAINLY, BOLD, ITALICS, SUPERSCRIPT AND UNDERLINED
Extract from the link you provided mjp. The Infamous Misunderstood Hot Spot
Where to begin? First of all, the 'hot spot' is a predicted consequence of any surface warming, (SO IF NO SURFACE WARMING. I TAKE IT THAT THE OCEANS HAS BEEN ABSORBING ALL 100% OF HEAT SINCE 1998 ROUGHLY)regardless of the cause, based on fundamental atmospheric physics (as we have previously explained). It's true that climate models predict the 'hot spot' will form, because models are based on that fundamental atmospheric physics. So ultimately Evans' beef is not with climate models, but with the physics of the moist adiabatic lapse rate (i.e. seeBengtsson and Hodges [2006]).
Secondly, fundamental physics also tells us that water vapor will be a positive feedback,increasing in response to warming according to the Clausius-Clapeyron relation. Indeed, numerous recent studies using empirical observational data have confirmed the positive water vapor feedback. For example, Dessler et al. (2008):
.......
There is also a significant amount of evidence that the 'hot spot' exists.(I CLICKED THIS LINK AND IT FINISHED OFF BY SAYING "So, does the “hot spot” actually exist? That is to say, is the tropsosphere actually warming as expected? Unfortunately, the answer to this is much less cut and dry." ) This remains an unresolved question, because the radiosonde data from the weather balloons Evans focuses on exclusively is not ideal. Weather balloons were not designed to measure long-term climate changes , especially in moisture(WELL OF COURSE THEY WERE NOT. A CLIMATE MODEL SHOULD SORT THIS OUT NO DOUBT). However, other measurements do indicate the presence of a 'hot spot' in the tropical troposphere. More research on the issue is needed, (CANNOT BE. THE MODELS HAVE FACTORED THIS AS PROVEN sarcasm) but it is incorrect to say there is no evidence for a 'hot spot'. "Skeptics" normally overstate uncertainty, but ironically in this case, Evans dramatically overstates certainty.
The adiabatic lapse rate also acts as a negative feedback by moving heat higher up into theatmosphere where it can more easily escape, which also serves to cool the surface. By arguing the 'hot spot' doesn't exist, Evans is contradicting his previous claims about negative feedbacks and low climate sensitivity. (I DONT SEE HOW THAT IS CONTRADICTORY. AT WORST IT WOULD IMPLY THAT MORE HEAT IS ESCAPING THE ATMOSPHERE IN WHICH THE MODELS DID NOT ASSUME WHEN PERFORMING THE AMPLIFICATION FACTOR)
Back in 2008, Chris Colose documented and explained Evans' confusion about the 'hot spot,' and suggested, "How Evans continues to go about this “hotspot” issue should be very revealing." I think we have our answer. Evans has not learned from his mistakes, instead choosing to misinform others by propagating his errors to a much wider, and sadly all too receptive audience.
