David, you write “The satellite observations say this dominance hypothesis is false, not that radiative physics is false”
Boy am I gald to see someone else writing this. To me, it is so obviously true, and it goes to the heart of why the proponents of CAGW are wrong. It is true that adding CO2 to the atmosphere changes the radiative balance. What is wrong is that there is any proper physics that allows us to go from a change in radiative balance to change in surface temperature. The assumption that this can be done by only looking at radiative effects has never been justified, and so far as I can see, and you clearly state, is just plain wrong.
But I am sure the proponents of CAGW will never admit this.
