[[That used to be true, but right now man’s contribution far exceeds the natural rise we would have seen.]]
What does that matrer? The fact still is that temps rise first, then CO2 rises- the mechanism for CO2 rising must include warming planet- the fact that man is pumping outm ore CO2 is meaningless- because the world is already warming- the increased CO2 is NOT causing the warming
[[There is about 90ppm rise in CO2 with about 8C rise in temperature:]]
Hmmm0- the hockey stick graph? As well- you have doen nothing to show CO2 is causing the warming- the CO2 is risning AFTER the warming as you can see by the beginning of the graph- temps are rising, CO2 follows LATER
[[No doubt those are challenging points to counter, but there is one simple explanation for a lot of them which is that the earth’s equilibrium temperature depends mainly on weather, not CO2 or other GH gases.]]
Hmmm, that is contrary to global warming alarmists claims
[[This is because of the effect I tried to explain above. The earth is a giant radiator trying to get rid of the sun’s heat.]]
Heat rises, as heat rises, it cools, and unless CO2 is capable of acting as some sort of massive super furnace mechanism, able to super heat the rising temperatures (which have cooled by the time it reaches the atmosphere), it is impossible for it to back radiate that air efficiently enough to cause any sort of warming, especially given the fact that only a very tiny fraction of the rising heat gets absorbed because there is only a very tiny fraction of CO2 in our atmosphere- the vast majority of heat goes right past the oversaturated tiny amount of CO2 and is not infact trapped because the tiny amount of CO2 is already saturated and not able to absorb any more- I would venture that only approx. 0.04% of the escaping heat gets trapped and only a small portion of that gets actually radiated back toward earth since heat radiates in all directions and only a fraction gets radiated toward earth— and no doubt cools by the time it reaches earth again-
So, unless CO2 acts as some sort of giant furnace In the atmosphere- it seems there can be no way it can heat the escaping heat enough to ensure that it is hotter than when it actually started rising when it reaches the earth again
Very simply, and these figures are nowhere near scientific facts, but to illustrate
The globe is average of 100 degrees
Heat rises from the earth and immediately begins to cool-
By the time it reaches atmosphere, it’s much cooler- say around 70 degrees (or wherever it would be- let’s just use 70 for the example)
CO2 absorbs it, then radiates it out in all directions- a tiny fraction of the small amount radiated gets shot back towards earth at a temp of say 80 due to some mechanism which heats the air somehow when it’;s being radiated back
it cools on it’s way back to earth which is still 100 degrees
By the time it reaches earth, it’s back down to say 70 degrees- this cooler air mixes with the hotter surface temps and has a net cooling effect- not warming effect-
Unless I’m missing something the whole premise of heat being trapped in atmosphere, then radiated back towards earth and causing global warming makes no sense at all
It seems much more l likely that some furnace in the sky is shooting heat towards earth in varying amounts at different times of year- (The sun) and that during high sun spot activity, the earth becomes warmer, and during lower sun spot activity, it become cooler-, and those who try to blame something that isn’t even sensible when looked at logically, are perpetrating a colossal lie that WILL... Make that IS causing massive financial hardships on people for soemthign they are NOT responsible for
What does that matrer? The fact still is that temps rise first, then CO2 rises- the mechanism for CO2 rising must include warming planet- the fact that man is pumping outm ore CO2 is meaningless- because the world is already warming- the increased CO2 is NOT causing the warming The Vostok core picture above shows that is impossible in this case. If the CO2 rise were natural and caused by warming, the world would have had to warm 10C on average since the Little Ice Age in order to produce the 280 to 400 rise. In order to produce the rise of about 25 ppm per decade, the oceans would have to be warming 2C per decade at least. That is simply not the case.
Hmmm0- the hockey stick graph?
Yes, a type of hockey stick, but accurate in this case. The ice core CO2 measurements are very crude by having only one CO2 measurement every few centuries (in the oldest cores) and having diffusion burring that measurement. So there could well be prior hockey sticks in CO2 that cannot be visible due to those factors. But there is no other evidence for CO2 hockey sticks in the past, not in the low resolution cores, and not in the high res cores from Greenland going back to the last ice age. The CO2 hockey stick is unique.
It is quite true that CO2 rises follow temperature rises, nobody disputes that. What is also true is that a temperature rise of 1C produced about a 10ppm CO2 rise some number of centuries later. But we have a 120ppm rise and still going up 2-3 ppm per year.
Hmmm, that is contrary to global warming alarmists claims
Quite true. Climate alarmists mostly do not understand the way earth's temperature is regulated. Greenhouse gas gives us a very rough range of temperature but the actual temperature is determined by weather. The simple fact that the earth's average temperature can rise or fall 0.1 or 0.2C in a couple of weeks should make that obvious. That is the equivalent of decades of CO2 rises theoretical contribution to temperature.
Heat rises, as heat rises, it cools, and unless CO2 is capable of acting as some sort of massive super furnace mechanism,
You are mixing up convection and radiation. Air that has been heated by the sun at the surface rises. That is convection. CO2 and other greenhouse gasses do not hinder convection in any way. In fact an increase in convection can easily offset an increase in GHG.
Radiation specifically infrared is what is hindered by CO2, water vapor, clouds, etc. Take a look at this satellite photo: 
which is false color, but the clear areas are warm (lots of outgoing infrared) and colored areas are less outgoing IR. The blues are cold cloud tops, hence little outgoing IR, one of the many ways that earth's temperature is regulated by weather. This IR measurement has decreased on average over the years:
but it is highly seasonal and very variable based on the average of global weather. This is yet more evidence of the relatively small role of CO2 in setting the global temperature. The best explanation for the decrease in OLR over the years is increased CO2. The specific spectral components also point to CO2 along with increased H2O, the latter can be completely natural.
The rest of your post mixes up convection (heated air rising) with radiation (heat lost to space at the speed of light). It is the case that radiation in certain wavelengths is absorbed by CO2, H2O and other GHG. Those newly warmed molecules nearly instantly transfer their heat to the O2 and N2 surrounding them. When there is more CO2 and H2O there is more capture and more warming. Those same molecules also release extra heat in the exact same quantities that they absorb it. The thing is, they release it both up and down so some goes back down to the surface.