Email about Miskolczi which we haven't hit yet:

Several AGW "skeptics" have started quoting this paper by Miskolczi:

http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=503

As far as I can work out it's claiming that the "optical depth" of the atmosphere is a constant so if CO2 increases absorption then something else must decrease in order to compensate. 

No reasoning seems to be given as to why it should be a constant. 

I found these sites on it, but it would be good if you could add something to your list of denier arguments so I can reference it:

http://bartonpaullevenson.com/Miskolczi.html

http://rabett.blogspot.com/2010/03/eli-can-retire-part-ii-so-much-for.html

http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Ferenc_Miskolczi

http://www.realclimate.org/docs/Rebuttal_Miskolczi_20100927.pdf

I believe nealjking looked into Miskolczi some time ago. Ask him/her.

I have a document from Miskolczi that is full of the words "a new theory" and how NASA was conspiring to supress it.