re: futhermore, causal factors
On one hand we have a causal model and tested hypothesis concerning a causal link where more CO2 leads to global warming.
On the other hand.... We have nothing but the conjecture (that you voice) that its the other way around, or that the two are causally decoupled.
If you have no testable (either in model or in empirical observation) hypothesis for the 'on the other hand' then you have nothing but hunch, belief, faith or desire.
Whats the better path, scientifically. To proceed under Hypothesis one, or to proceed under hypothesis two.
To me its clear. And I think also its clear to anyone who places rationality over ideology.
Yeti