->The infrared absorption of carbon dioxide is measured
its absorbtion and radiation
but more CO2 definately doesn't mean a hotter atmosphere.
Because you don't just trap more heat - you also prevent more sunlight entering in the first place.
Venus isn't hot because of the greenhouse effect, it's hot because of the enormous pressures caused by an incredibly dense atmosphere.
If this "runaway" could happen here and was even fractionally likely I see no reason it wouldn't of already of happened sometime in the Earths billions of years history.
Getting the right answer by the wrong working does not mean you got the answer right.
I agree. That is, however, no reason to dismiss the science.
Science is repeatability and reproducibility, climate models are nothing more than reading tealeafs atm imho, since there is no way to reproduce or repeat a hundred billion year experiment.
And "science" also needs to accurately report it's error terms, there is no way you will get me to believe any honest climate model could measure a +0.7'C increase in average temperature when that is less than the error term we have in actual measurements (on the global scale, where that "average" is a - damn complex - model already), especially when most of the stations being used to take the measurements have been distorted by urbanisation - the ones that are left that is, there something like 70% less temperature stations in the readings now than there was 50 years ago.