No. The total thermal energy of the atmosphere is much higher now.
If the overall temperature of the atmosphere were increasing then the ideal gas law dictates that the atmosphere must expand or its pressure must increase or some combination of the two..
Because more heat is being trapped in the lower atmosphere, less of it is getting to the upper atmosphere.
Poppycock..
But reduced drag on satellites is the result of more CO2 in the atmosphere:
That, and less uvb heating of the upper atmosphere due to reduced ozone levels...
But yes, increasing the amount of co2 at the expense of O increases the emissivity of the atmosphere thus more IR is emitted for any given temp..
And as co2 governs radiative cooling of the upper atmosphere, increasing its concentration increases the rate at which it radiatively cools to space...
Models of carbon dioxide warming prepared decades ago, accurately predicted the warming trend we see today. Can't get better validation than that. Would you like me to show you that?
Haha, sure show me. I will point out here as well that correlation does not prove causation..
Yes. The vast majority of thermal energy at the surface is due to sunlight.
I guess that would depend on how you define surface. Certainly water has kept the Earth surface cool and the resulting rock insulation slowed the cooling of the Earths interior.
(Water is Earths primary coolant.. Co2s cooling effect is almost insignificant in comparison..)
I believe I showed the actual heat flux at the surface from thermal energy within the Earth, and it's negligible relative to radiant warming.
If the geothermal heat flux is insignificant, how much more insignificant is the
negative heat flux from the atmosphere to the surface?
Peace!