BeesKnee5 wrote:The facts don't agree with you,
The facts most definitely and indisputably agree with me: there is no climate "crisis" or "emergency," and there never will be one caused by human emissions of CO2 from use of fossil fuels. That is absolutely certain.
the scientific bodies don't agree with you and the fossil fuel industry doesn't agree with you.
Who does agree with you?
Only honest, intelligent, informed and rational realists. So yes, it's lonely being right.
The mistake you appear to be making is that the extra blanket raises the effective emission height at which IR radiates into space, further slowing the loss of energy and therefore raising temperatures at ground level.
Just like the extra blanket on the stack of 20. It just doesn't raise the surface temperature
noticeably. You seem to be congenitally unable to comprehend the fact that if doubling CO2 would raise surface temps by >3C, that would indeed be a problem and you would be right; but because it would only raise them by <0.3C, that is not a problem and I am right. In both cases, CO2 is raising surface temperature -- we agree on that -- but the implications are completely different.
Now you can argue that it's not linear and each blanket needs to be twice the thickness of the previous one to have the same effect, but what of it? That is what the scientists agree on.
No they don't. The whole anti-CO2 narrative is based on ASSUMING wildly unrealistic positive water vapor feedback that we KNOW cannot be correct as it would have made the earth's climate unstable -- and would make
literal greenhouse temperatures inconveniently unstable, too (hint: it doesn't).
Hausfather has written an interesting article on the research and expectations of today's climate scientists.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/13/opin ... -2023.html
Hausfather is one of the Usual Suspects.