Koobee-doo has never attempted to answer my assertion -- even though he may have found the elementary flaw, perhaps the same as you, in the standard gedankenspiel -- that the internal (angular) momenta of atoms *must* be accounted-for, relativistically.
> It is mathematically consistent BUT ONLY if the RoS is assumed correct.
thus: they never get this metaphor, perhaps because it seems to be mixed, that "global" warming is a misnomer, an oxymoron or nonsequiter, because Ahrrenius et al have never bothered to apply the glasshouse "effect" to a model of an actual glass house, sited at some lattitude on Eaaarth.
thus: aren't Himalyan glaciers a significant ration of all glaciers, aside from those areound AnIS and GrIS?
> In fact where I am sitting at the moment > in the State of NJ was once under a glacier.
thank you, IAS!
thus: it is quite clear that our alteration of the biosphere is rapidly changing the rate & kind of "evapotranspiration," notably through urban heat-islanding -- I be a verb -- and deforestation.
however, note that these only appear to *increase* the rate of snowfall on GrIS and AnIS, the vast bulk of terrestrial ice, as shown in the slides of the Man from NOAA, Swiss govt. affiliate, at two catered events in Los Angeles, last year!