Well, I did expect you to go running into the sunset with it. So you are predictable. But, no, jopo, it doesn't acknowledge everything you said.
The paper is quite clear on the impacts of that modelling simplification. It alters the W/m2 by only about 2 in 240 iirc. So there's no support for your claims about insufficient solar heat. Which is why I was comfortable posting it. It's of interest, but it actually rebuts your argument.
Nice try, jopo, but nope, it's not supporting your argument. Quite the opposite.
