Seems like something other than flying might be a better target to reduce carbon emissions.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emiss... says that transport is 14% of total global GHG emissions.
And http://www.atag.org/facts-and-figures.html says that airplanes are 12% of transport emissions.
If we stick water vapour and co2 above the weather layer in the atmosphere, it will act like a pane of glass in a greenhouse? Right? You can't rain anything down from 35000ft can you?
Look at the warming graphs/animations, most warming happens in the northern hemisphere (where most planes fly), since about 1970, which is when air travel became popular accross the northern hemisphere.
Call me crazy (I know it's dangerous to make assertions without 150% of the facts) but that seems to me like an obvious thing that would affect warming. Please don't reply with some fact based rebuttal - hasn't helped so far.
I'm more likely to trust the numbers than someone who says "don't reply with facts". Yes, there is common sense; numbers can be misleading. But common sense can also be misleading; don't cling to it against all evidence.
I see contrails every day above my head, they fill the sky on some days.
There is a problem with the sky, the coincidence seems striking to me.
Like smokers in the 1930's being prescribed cigarettes - common sense should be able to indicate a truth that is yet to properly emerge.
Water vapour from planes (contrails) have a complex effect and is not yet fully understood see:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/airplane-contra...