Steve_American wrote:OK, now I can reply, because now you actually said something.
I always say something, and it is always informative and usually entertaining. Unlike your "contributions."
You are doing a calculation with your gut. Sort of like a "gut feeling".
No, I am identifying the quantitative implications of the data you referenced.
The flaw in your reasoning is that you don't understand why the earth is covered with snow and ice. The reason is that the snow and ice are white and reflect 90% or more of the sun's energy back into space before it heats up the rocks or water.
That only describes what the snowball-earth climate was, not why it happened -- which we do not know.
This is totally different from the situation now.
Right: back then there was far less water vapor in the air because it was so cold. Therefore, additional CO2 will have far less effect now because IR absorption spectra are already saturated by water vapor.
So, your gut is useless as a guide.
Unlike yours, my gut is educated in the subject of atmospheric physics, able to consider the facts rationally, and competent to do some ballpark calculations.
IIRC, I read once in a snowball earth article decades ago, that if the eart gets ice and snow from the 60 deg. latitude to both poles, then so much of the dun's energy s reflected that the rest of the planet will freeze over almost no matter how much GHGs are in the air.
No, we know with absolute certainty that that did not happen, because the fossil record shows life went on. Therefore, there must have been liquid water at the earth's surface.
That should help you understand the awesome power of the albedo effect.
I understand the albedo effect incomparably better than you, as I have proved.
However, your position is set, so you must find a way to say I'm wrong.