I sometimes wonder... I notice that when fraudcurrents is getting crushed on the science... all of sudden a few sock puppets come out to change the subject and start flame wars. I suspect there or services that sell content to boards (actually I know there are) and dbphoenix and jack hershey and their supporting puppets get page view ups and then go onto the next board. Then a cheaper level of service takes those handles and others and just makes content by taking the opposite side of the argument... Stu and his many incarnations come to mind. Then there is the leftist troll moron level of service just to argue with all the low tax people on threads. The leftist troll moron service is cheaper and it comes with the leftist troll moron and the use of 4 or 5 handles to co troll... but offer no substance. Then there are people who post for the DNC and then disappear when their funding goes away... AK was one of those. I presume the right has those too. I suspect Piezoe and AAA are professional writers or professional who write a lot. Piezoe especially uses all sorts of professional level rhetorical devices in his writing. I really learned from the way he gave us a the professional misdirection on the 1986 tax cuts yesterday. He opened with an allusion to supply side tax cuts... but then spoke of the 1986 restructuring as a tax cut specifically. A masterful misdirection without it being an outright lie. This technique is used by the top writers on the left.
we already have a delicate balance in our atmosphere. first of all co2 and other ghc's block some of the IR light and the energy that could warm the earth on the way in. you seem to sticking with 25 year old thought. You need to update. For instance if by adding more co2 you block the warming which happens coincident with sun spots (cmes) ... you can could impact the balance. but even if you do not want to think about that... . there are many studies coming out by nutter and non nutters speculating about co2s impact on water vapor... almost almost everyone agrees water vapor definitely impacts temperature.
CO2 does not block incoming light, but it would absorb incoming IR, as you said, for the same reason it absorbs outgoing IR: it is a physical property of the molecule itself. I deliberately said "absorb" instead of block, because "block" makes one think the entity being blocked does not come into contact with some subject. But we, the subject, as well as other matter such as the other elements of the atmosphere, water and ice, etc. are all in direct contact with CO2. So as CO2 cools, it warms us.
you are mixing and matching properties. below is a website which covers both sides of this issue. I think its slightly slanted... but worth reading. http://debatewise.org/debates/455-co2-does-not-cause-global-warming/#yes1
Yes, lot's of things do two different things. We usually are concerned with which is most important. Water is necessary for life and can also kill. And CO2 DOES- not may - warm via the greenhouse effect. This is climate science 101 which you still have trouble grasping for some reason. And yes it acts as a shield to block heat.
I'm not going to read a piece asserting "CO2 does not cause global warming" because you say I'm mixing properties of the CO2 molecule. So which properties of the molecule are you referring to?
Again, you seem to think that what you suspect is worth more than a festering ideologically deranged lying pile of shit. It is not.