I have no idea what you are trying to tell me, especially your CO2 binding with organic materials to create plant and animal matter. Plants and animals are created through reproduction, not chemical reactions with the atmosphere. (yes, prevalent CO2 creates the potential for greater reproduction, but there are a variety of other things needed for it to occur) I also don’t understand your point about equilibrium. Yes, the Earth has a variety of balancing mechanisms to maintain stability. However, equilibrium obviously hasn’t been reached, because CO2 levels in the atmosphere are building, and are up 30% in the last decade. please explain this further to me.
“because CO2 levels in the atmosphere are building, and are up 30% in the last decade. please explain this further to me.”
Because CO2 goes up and down over time. Even if up %30, CO2 is something like 2% of the constituency of the greenhouse gases.
We only have the ability to cause about a 10% change in the CO2.
10% x 2% = .2% net effect.
Now, if we could change the water vapor, we could control the weather. At least that would be the smart place to put money.
All living things are made up of Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen and nitrogen with other elements join in in smaller quantities. If you grow from 8 pounds to 200 pounds, you take up a lot of CO2 as do plants and especially trees.
It takes time for chemical reactions to move away from or towards equilibrium. It is far from instantaneous where carbon dioxide is concerned. Small sea creatures (like coral) take up carbon dioxide from the sea and the atmosphere and combine it with calcium to make limestone and coral reefs. It takes a long time, but it is
inexorable. This is why the AGW argument is so naive. It is not looking at the correct timing for the processes.
You really need to look at the way life works on the planet. It is called the carbon cycle.