Martin:

Do climate scientists who write this stuff ever stop to think about it? Or is it simply rote-learning for them?

Rhoda:

Martin, it is claims like that, thoughtlessly expressed, which make people think there is a breach of the second law.

My answer to Martin's first question is yes, some climate scientists do stop to think about it. They notice people thinking there is a breach of the second law and they fail to correct their explanation to avoid this impression. As Nullius in Verba put it seventeen days ago:

I think as far as they're concerned, it's quite useful for them if we waste our time going round in circles. There's no advantage to them helping us get our story straight. And I rather suspect many of them are a bit confused about the physics, too.

I returned to the thread on reading that and commented:

I buy both parts of the explanation. A call to the wise. Ever-decreasing circles from here on in, I hope.

Deliberate deception is present here, in other words, as elsewhere, and so is incompetence. Who can be surprised by either?