re: Your occasional reminder that global warming is real,

quote:

---

Cutting to the chase relative to AGW, positive feedback results in a nonlinear CO2=>Temp relationship. i.e., With increases of atmospheric CO2, there is a declination in its collective greenhouse effect.

The point being, PF would not eliminate forcing contribution at any concentration, nor of course would it reverse the effect. In other words, PF has nothing to do with "off-switch" or cooling.

With an implied progressive declination of effect, we've also previously discussed PF as undercutting of AGW alarmism.

---

Right, but actual emissions have risen exponentially. Exponential forcing + logarithmic feedback = close-to-linear rise (I say close because obviously they aren't perfect inverses).

So GMST will continue to increase until we stop emitting GHGs, at which point it will coast for a few more decades on feedbacks (such as oceanic outgassing, and others such as ice-albedo) and then settle on a new baseline.

This is why I don't understand your contention that CO2 driving temperature requires the existence of some kind of "off-switch." The off switch is to stop emitting. All positive feedback means is that the rise in temperature wouldn't be arrested immediately even if we magically developed fusion power tomorrow.