My response to a person who was denigrating those who challenge the narrative of CO2 climate change:

So, you're sure that human produced CO2 is causing the current climate change.
Here's a few inconvenient facts.
1. CO2 makes up but .0004 of the total atmospheric gaseous profile. NOT much.
2. Humans safely produce 12% of that, although some will say most of it. And they are grossly wrong. I actually looked at the stoichiometry used to measure the tonnage of human produced CO2. Its GROSSLY over-exaggerate d. Why? They assume ALL carbon atoms from carbon fuels eventually becomes the carbon atoms of CO2 molecules. That has NEVER happened and never will happen.
I used as a basis for my conclusion actual physical research of which I was a part. We once studied the properties of particulate carbon using Raman spectroscopy. <--Not the tasty noodle. What was our goal? To turn black smoke(particula te carbon) into white smoke(water vapor) I get a kick out of adds coming from the AGW world that show smoke stacks with black smoke to prove CO2 emissions. Of course, they "forgot" that CO2 is a colorless gas.
So...let's just take that .0004 of total CO2 and factor in 12%. The amount human influence would be .000048 of the total gaseous profile. Ain't much.
Now let's look at the "macro" quantum mechanics of the CO2 molecule. <-Not talking about the Eigenstates, Eigenvalues or harmonic oscillations. With sunlight it vibrates in four phases. In its symmetrical stretching phase, it CANNOT retain IR or heat. In its asymmetrical stretching phase, it can retain IR or heat. In its two bending phases it can only briefly retain IR or heat as it transitions through a symmetrical phase.
We can now safely state that its quantum ability is about half. Now factor in .50 to the .00004 = .00002.
To say that man's contribution of CO2 to the GASEOUS atmospheric profile is actually causing climate change is ludicrous, at best.
This can be emphasized by the fact that CO2 levels reached 4000 ppm during parts of the Cretaceous and man was not here to cause or abate it...but it all changed by itself. And now we have fools predicting catastrophic climate change at 400+ppm.
To help yourself out, I would suggest you also gain a better understanding of the heat retention abilities of gas vs liquid vs solid.
And to make it easier to understand...go to humid Louisiana and to dry Nevada on an equally hot day. When the sun goes down, it becomes much cooler in Nevada and remains quite hot in Louisiana. Hint: It ain't because of atmospheric CO2.

1 Think about the statement that, "CO2 makes up but .0004 of the total atmospheric gaseous profile," for a minute. That means that as heat makes its way up through the atmosphere, there is only 1 chance in 250 million that it will hit a CO2 molecule to bounce off of. That's a pretty inefficient greenhouse.

2 Right you are Bill.  Not much of a greenhouse ceiling, is it?

This whole argument is ridiculous. Mars has more CO2 in it's ridiculously thin atmosphere than does the Earth - it's 95% CO2 and 1/100th the overall volume - and it is far, far colder, much colder than would be expected given the amount of radiation it receives.  If CO2 were so powerful a greenhouse gas Mars would be warmer. Much carbon dioxide is frozen at the polls as dry ice in winter, and a lot of Martian air is frozen as permafrost. That wouldn't be the case if the carbon dioxide were as powerful a greenhouse gas as they claim.