Could you quantify the effect of CO2 on water distribution? How about other factors, such as the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation? We still do not even have predictable models for these natural oceanic patterns. The quantity of H2O on this planet VASTLY outweighs the quantity of CO2. Oceans cover 70% of the Earth's surface and are deep. The marginal difference in CO2 is not enough to move ocean currents. It is a trace gas that has gone from 280 ppm to 400 ppm. The heat capacity of water is very high and far more than what a few CO2 molecules can absorb or re-emit. The oceans store massive quantities of heat and move it around in cycles that sometimes last hundreds of years. In addition, CO2 has a thinner radiative band that it can block than water vapor. And when water takes the form of clouds it can influence temperature in dramatic ways. Cosmic rays have a strong influence on global cloudiness, known as the Svensmark effect, and this influences precipitation patterns.

We are also having near record levels of snow across the Northern Hemisphere, which according to your world view, shouldn't be happening: https://globalcryospherewatch.org/state_of_cryo/snow/fmi_swe...

You seem to be arguing that, because the planetary mass of CO2 is smaller than that of water, CO2 changes cannot substantively affect water transport.

So, I’d strongly suggest you should just read the NCA, because this argument is both ridiculous and false according to known science.

Yes I am arguing that point precisely because that's what thermodynamics dictates.

Because of solar insolation, the system is not closed. In particular, we have a valve (CO2) controlling insolation and reflection. You would not argue that the effect of a Mylar sheet placed above a sunny swimming pool has to do with the mass of the Mylar.

Incidentally, it’s worth mentioning that, while I’m not an expert, I have several recent publications in hydrology, and I talk regularly with climate scientists and hydrologists about drought, including coauthors of the report I linked. The lines of argument you stated above are nonsense, I’m afraid. If you care about this subject, please do yourself the favor of reading some high-quality research summaries. It’s actually quite striking how much we do know about the Earth system.

Mylar is a non porous material. The actual greenhouse effect is caused by trapping warm air in as it is warmed from the water itself. The solar energy first enters the pool through the transparent material, warms the water, and then the warm water warms the air. The mylar traps the warm air from rising as it naturally would, where it would mix with colder air and cause another thermodynamic exchange.

CO2 does not act literally like a blanket over the earth, that's not how radiation works. If CO2 cannot retain the heat then it will be lost to space at night.

The closest thing to a true blanket effect would be clouds, although they have complex shapes and depending on where they are located in the atmosphere can have either a cooling or warming effect. They are made up of mostly liquid water and do vary according to solar activity through cosmic ray flux as shown in Svensmark's work. Link above.