Time to drop a brick of epistemology on a table full of vibes. - Climate change

[Anomalism]

Lower left ... 0.6 W/m^2 is trivial ... this chart includes convection ... well done ... close to a 25% the energy isn't changing temperature at the surface ...

It's over the entire surface of the planet. What number were you expecting per meter?

Honestly ... 1.8 W/m^2 is what's measured ... give or take 0.5 W/m^2 ... and this "1.8" figure is what the IPCC uses ... this measurement was taken over only 25 years ... so we have no idea what the 20th Century average was ... nothing to compare to ...

Trenberth et al (2009) includes convection in their calculations ... I want to see Anomalism's energy budget ... he's keeping this energy at the surface and I want to see if there's anything in his citation that would explain this neglect, other than his inability to understand the scientific literature ...

Some back-of-the-$100-bill calculation gives us a total of 0.1ºC warming for all the CO2 we've released into the atmosphere ... using your post ... on average ... math is hard, especially for liberals ...

That 0.1C calculation misses the point that radiative forcing isn’t just about instantaneous surface energy. It accumulates over time and is amplified by feedbacks. 1.8 W/m2 averaged over the entire planet, sustained year after year, translates into heat stored in the oceans, land, and atmosphere. That’s exactly how climate sensitivity works. Direct CO2 forcing (1C) plus fast feedbacks brings the observed 1-1.2C surface warming so far.

Convection is already part of the energy balance; it redistributes energy vertically and horizontally but doesn’t nullify the net positive forcing. Ignoring feedbacks or the long-term accumulation of energy drastically underestimates the impact of CO2, which is why a simple per year, per square meter instant warming is misleading.