Can you show that the amount of water in the atmosphere has increased significantly? You keep repeating that water is higher, but this is not a case where absolute values are significant, but the changes in relative concentrations. If you have a 25-30% increase in CO2 that's more significant than a <1% change in H2O. Yes, variations in temps can cause a change in humidity. Don't we see that every summer? What's not plausible about it? This doesn't happen in one direction. Look at what happens at night, temps go down and we get dew on the grass. In the morning it heats up and the dew evaporates.
from the NOAA's ESRL @ boulder, co.
this indicates a greater than 2% change. while you dismiss the significance of that -- the very theme of this thread -- this pattern more directly mimics the change in atmospheric temperature, coincides with el nino effects and constitutes a trend which acts more significantly on the greenhouse effect than carbon has the potential to, even in the higher concentrations which you propose. CO2 is marginally significant in the overall GHeffect, a fractional change in it may not explain the rise in the temperature of the atmosphere, particularly since a rise is indicated in a more -- the most -- significant contributor to greenhouse effect.
this chart:
courtesy of this blog illustrates the spectral efficiency of the compounds in question, lending an insight into the dominance of H2O in GHeffect. do you question the vast volumetric advantage of water over the other gases? volumetrically, a 2-3% increase in H2O is about as significant as your proposed 25-30% rise in CO2. this is before accounting for efficiency. considering that, it is H2O increases are substantially more significant. can you refute that?
No, I won't refute it. I'll propose that the 2-3% increase in H2O is a result of the 25-30% increase in CO2. What's your explanation for the increase in H2O?
And exactly how does that work?