What is changing the climate, without the assumptions?

[longview]

Until someone shows me why I should change my mind, I am going with 0.5 degrees.

I thought the 1.2 C per doubling was plausible because of the stated 3.71 W m-2 of energy imbalance,
but now we have 24 years of CO2 levels increasing without any increase in energy imbalance that CO2 could affect.
At this point I think added CO2 going forward, will not cause any warming.
This is not to say past CO2 did not cause any warming only that at the current levels, it has run out of potential.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I thought the 1.2 C per doubling was plausible because of the stated 3.71 W m-2 of energy imbalance,
but now we have 24 years of CO2 levels increasing without any increase in energy imbalance that CO2 could affect.
At this point I think added CO2 going forward, will not cause any warming.
This is not to say past CO2 did not cause any warming only that at the current levels, it has run out of potential.

Yes, without considering the two layer actions in the atmosphere, the 1.2 pans out mathematically, assuming the 3.71 is correct at the TOA.

I'm sticking with what I concluded in post 6 of this thread:

My assumed sensitivity to CO2

I have pondered this question for some time regarding CO2 sensitivity. I am going to float the idea of a very simple model and it produces a sensitivity of 0.7 degrees of warming for a doubling of CO2. It's actually quite simple. No complex modeling needed. Not all the variables are linear, in...

debatepolitics.com