As the direct warming effect of CO2 greenhouse effect is rather marginal, (arguably beween 0.1 and 1.0 degrees C per doubling CO2), we invented the famous positive feedback, notably of the much stronger greenhouse effect of water vapor, snow albedo, and what not, to get it to the IPCC ~3 degrees per doubling CO2.
It's almost over
positive feedback, have we been fooling ourselves?The traditional way in which feedbacks have been diagnosed from observational data has very likely misled us about the existence of positive feedbacks in the climate system.
Our new analyses of satellite observations of intraseasonal oscillations suggest negative cloud feedbacks, supporting Lindzen’s Infrared Iris hypothesis.
I am increasingly convinced that understanding precipitation systems is the key to understanding climate sensitivity.
But then again, no positive feedback, we knew that already for years:
http://www.aai.ee/~olavi/2001JD002024u.pdf
Not much science left for anthropogenic global warming
edit,
The author
