OK, ignoring the fact that NOAA and GISS remove inconvenient data. Then they homogenise what is left and infill data. Then claim they have a great GLOBAL TEMPERATRE profile of the Earth. OK, LOL
One thing that is not disputed is that cloud cover has reduced in the last 25 years. Greater ASR is the result. Accompanying this is a greater OLR.
Your science is done. Those facts alone F your settled science claims.. CO2 is supposed to trap OLR. Not release more OLR.
If you wally's do not know what ASR and OLR is then you are just the stupid sheep defending your religion blindly.
So as to avoid getting bogged down in details, let’s assume, for argument's sake, that back radiation from the tropopause can indeed reach the surface (which in reality, it cannot). However in yours and your shepherds hypothetical scenario, CO₂ could potentially contribute up to a maximum of 12 W/m², which represents the amount it absorbs from the surface. However, it is important to note that during this same period, the Earth absorbs far more solar radiation, which gets stored in the atmosphere's thermal mass. This thermal mass plays a critical role in storing energy and the redistributing of it. In which time impact of CO₂ becomes almost negligible in comparison. CO₂ might appear to contribute, but its influence is overshadowed by the far greater energy stored in thermal mass. To put it simply: CO₂’s effect is like a child claiming they did all the heavy lifting—it's clearly outmatched by the real work done by the system as a whole.
