Re-read the IPCC text which you quoted: "It has been suggested that the absorption by CO2 is already saturated so that an increase would have no effect." and "...this absorption is saturated"
and before that you said
"CO2 has very little warm forcing left at the 410 ppm level, a doubling might add a total of 1C more warming. That is it. But since there are not enough easily recoverable "fossil fuel" left to get to that doubling year, not likely to ever reach the 700 ppm level by year 2100."
If you want to insist that shouldn't be read as "the effect is saturated", then I would have to term you as extremely disingenuous.
PS: the Business-as-Usual scenario (RCP 8.5) has CO2 at 1300 ppm by 2100.
and before that you said
"CO2 has very little warm forcing left at the 410 ppm level, a doubling might add a total of 1C more warming. That is it. But since there are not enough easily recoverable "fossil fuel" left to get to that doubling year, not likely to ever reach the 700 ppm level by year 2100."
If you want to insist that shouldn't be read as "the effect is saturated", then I would have to term you as extremely disingenuous.
PS: the Business-as-Usual scenario (RCP 8.5) has CO2 at 1300 ppm by 2100.
Last edited: