First of all, I don't have hours of spare time to wade through multi-page posts. Shakespear said that bevity is the soul of wit. Try taking that lesson to heart and learn to make a point.

As to this one, "I'm still waiting for even a half ass attempt let alone a rigorous one on your part to explain why a rigorously proven greenhouse gas can be added to the atmosphere with no concern about global warming. I'm also sorry if my "political objective" of minimizing potential loss of life and property conflicts with your political philosophy."

Carbon dioxide isn't a pollutant like nitrous oxide or other emissions. It is an essential component of virtually all life on Earth. Other than bizarre ecosystems like around the deep ocean vents, every animal on Earth inhales oxygen and exhales carbon dioxide. Conversely, plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen.

Increased CO2 doesn't automatically imply increased temperatures. Some of the extra CO2 will almost certainly lead to increased plant life, resulting in increased O2, your simplistic assumption to the contrary. Likewise, the most common greenhouse gas is water vapor. Increased water vapor at low altitudes does trap heat, but increased clouds at high altitudes has been shown to reflect more heat than it traps. How well do the new models reflect solar variability, cloud effects, ocean currents, and plant activity?