re: #344 groovimus

Ignoring the correction of negative feedback is the major flaw of AGW alarmism.

What negative feedback? There is positive feedback from water vapor, not negative. Increased water vapor causes increased heat trapping. CO2 causes— as you’ve acknowledged— more heat to be trapped. Water vapor increases when more heat is trapped.

So, instead of a negative feedback loop, it’s a positive one. You haven’t demonstrated— or even attempted— otherwise.

Sounds like the feedback loop gets “created” in real time? Man, those creative powers are just so —- I mean really CREATIVE

This is incomprehensible on your part. I’m not sure if you realize it; it sounds like you think this is a rather clever slam, but it simply comes off as more of your obtuse and unreadable English.

Heaven forbid anyone introduce a simpified scientific process description here especially after being lambasted by the host as a scientific fraud.

But you didn’t do that; you threw around jargon, and you introduced a malformed, illogical, and self-contradictory ‘scientific progress description’. You claimed that water vapor somehow compensated for CO2— you didn’t show this mechanism of action or explain it in the least. Indeed, you couldn’t do so, given that the opposite is true.