Modern climate "science" = a little real science + a lot of assumptions and speculation

The only real science,
believe it or not, 

is simple laboratory 

experiments, using 

infrared spectroscopy, 

showing that all atmospheric gases 

should affect the flow of heat 

(aka  radiant energy) 

from the sun to the Earth,

and from the Earth to space. 

Gases that should affect 

infrared radiation 

              (heat) 

rising from Earth to space,

      (cooling the planet)

are called greenhouse gases.

Water vapor is 

the most important 

greenhouse gas, by far.

Carbon dioxide is a

minor greenhouse gas, 

both in concentration 

and absorption efficiency.

The infrared (heat) absorption 

ability of CO2 is limited, and at 

pre-industrial levels of CO2,

was already approaching 

saturation levels, where the 

effect of more CO2 

approaches insignificance. 

The predicted effect of CO2

is logarithmic. 

Greenhouse gases mainly affect 

the half of Earth that's cooling at night 

-- so the minimum temperature 

during the night should not go as low.

The effect is 

usually described

as "warming" 

( after the high and low temperatures 

of a day are averaged, the resulting

average temperature of the day 

should be higher ("warmer"),

by some amount ).

The amount 

of CO2 warming 

is unknown 

because there's 
no way 

to determine 

whether 
"warming" 

is natural 

or man made.

Many people claim they know.

But they don't know.

The UN's IPCC claims 

"over half" of the warming 

since 1950 is "man made".

Perhaps "over half"
is a good compromise, 
because the right number
is between zero and 100%?

But the correct answer is:
No one knows!

There is no real science 

behind that "over 50%" claim

-- it is a guess -- 
and the other famous claim, 
of "95% confidence",
is meaningless -- it's just
a self-serving popular vote 
of IPCC activists and scientists, 
'patting themselves on the back'
-- that's not science at all.

Real science requires admitting

that the warming effect 
of CO2 is unknown,

and never guessing
what it might be.

Real science estimates 

the worst possible 

warming effect of CO2,

by making the following assumption:

- Assume 100% of  the warming 

since 1950 was caused by CO2.

... then real science asks the 

following question: 

Based on that assumption,  

how much warming 

would a doubling 

of the CO2 level cause? 

And based on that 

worst case assumption,

doubling the level 

of CO2 in the air,

from 410 ppm to 820 ppm,

would increase 

the average temperature

by a mere +1 degree C., 

and that small +1 degree 

of warming would take 

100 to 200 years 

= CO2 is totally harmless,

even with a worst case 

CO2 warming assumption !

All scientists know 

the effect of CO2 alone

is totally harmless,

and not a problem.

So why does anyone care about CO2 ?

I've been asking myself that question

for the past 21 years, as I read about

climate science.

THE ANSWER :

Some scientists claim, 

with no proof at all,

that minor warming from CO2 

will be amplified by more water vapor

in the atmosphere, which will cause

additional warming -- tripling the 

warming allegedly caused 

by CO2 alone.

That theory / assumption 

was published in 

the 1979 Charney Report -- 

+3.0 degrees C. warming

from doubling CO2 in the air

+/- 1.5 degrees C.

That unproven theory 

has not changed since 1979.

In fact, climate computer models 

predict about +3 degree C. 

warming from a doubling 

of CO2 levels too.

But the climate models

make wrong predictions !

They typically predict 

triple the warming that

actually happened since

1975 !

In real science, that means

the +3.0 degrees C. theory

has been falsified, 
and the +1.0 degrees C. theory 
remains a possibility.

But in modern climate "science",

it appears that no theory 

can ever be falsified, 
and that is true
only of junk science !