How much of this increase is due to increasing ocean temps, and how much is due to combustion is up for question (since the math doesn’t add up given the mass of carbon being burned worldwide vs the total mass of the atmosphere - but that’s just another area where the AGW extremist arguments fail), but there HAS BEEN a 31+% increase in CO2.
Water vapor is 95% of all GHG, and none of it is man-made.
However, man’s total greenhouse gas contribution is ONLY 0.28% of all GHG’s. The remaining amount is natural methane, natural CO2, natural ozone, etc.
Thus, without man, GHG = 100.0
With man’s contribution, GHG = 100.28
Assume we double CO2 concentration, assume NONE of the increase is due to ocean degassing, and assume methane remains the same level (as it is now.) That where you get (less than) 1.2% of GHG effect is man-caused under worst case conditions. The GHG effect is logarithmic by the way, not linear: This means that adding 25 ppm more CO2 (going from 275 to 300) has a greater effect than going from 375 to 400, from 425 to 450, or from 675 to 700. Doubling CO2 does NOT double the GHG effect.
Your arguments all seem out-of-date, from GCMs to temperature profiles to this. The oceans are a HUGE carbon SINK! National Geographic: Oceans Found to Absorb Half of All Man-Made Carbon Dioxide
The GHG effect is logarithmic by the way, not linear
And yet, I thought that up-thread, you discounted Meyre, et al.'s equation. Is it the coefficient you question, or what?