Cannabis And Cancer Of The Brain

Eric brought to my attention this news. Marijuana kills brain cancer, new study confirms.

The active molecules in cannabis kill brain cancer — another study has revealed.

Scientists using an extract of whole-plant marijuana rich in pot’s main psychoactive ingredient THC as well as cannabidiol (CBD) showed “dramatic reductions in tumor volumes” of a type of brain cancer.

“High-grade glioma is one of the most aggressive cancers in adult humans and long-term survival rates are very low as standard treatments for glioma remain largely unsuccessful,” according to researchers Katherine A. Scott, Angus G. Dalgleish, and Wai M. Liu from the Oncology Department at St. George’s University of London.

Writing in Molecular Cancer Therapeutics this month, the team recounts how they decided to build on existing research that shows “cannabinoids have been shown to specifically inhibit glioma growth as well as neutralize oncogenic processes such as angiogenesis.”

Which reminded me of a post I did about a day ago on the same subject

The subject of the post was a press release by the National Brain Cancer Foundation.

The Cannabinoid Research Group of Complutense University in Madrid, Spain and Voices Against Brain Cancer, a national foundation headquartered in New York, announce today that a collaborative alliance has been signed by both organizations. The consideration of the benefits of Marijuana and the compounds contained within the plant known as “cannabinoids” for medicinal purposes is currently a prominent subject matter in North America. In an effort to fast track the propagation of accurate scientific based information on therapeutic opportunities incorporating cannabinoids, these two groups have formed an exclusive partnership in the United States.


When asked about the research findings to date, Mr. Guzman noted that “published research clearly shows the anticancer action of cannabinoids impacting glioblastoma multiforma (GBM), and how chemotherapy results of tumor reduction are improved upon by adding cannabinoids as part of the treatment regimen.”

“We have an obligation to remain open minded about where the cure for brain cancer will come from, said Michael Klipper, Chairman of Voices Against Brain Cancer. Manuel Guzmán and his research team are world class leaders in the clinical research of cannabinoids and cancer.” We recognize our responsibility to disseminate the information associated with the published research, which supports the medicinal legitimacy and can help guide patients and government lawmakers when considering the use of Cannabinoids.”

So cannabis boosts chemotherapy or radiation treatment of brain cancer.

At 4 minutes into this next video the speaker says (approximately), “the government has known for 40 years that cannabis fights cancer”. That would be monstrous if true. Below the video I’ll provide some links to the evidence.

Fronm 2008: What Your Government Knows About Cannabis And Cancer — And Isn’t Telling You.

Even with successful surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy treatment, gliomas — a highly aggressive form of brain cancer that strikes approximately 10,000 Americans annually — tragically claim the lives of 75 percent of its victims within two years and virtually all within five years.

But what if there was an alternative treatment for gliomas that could selectively target the cancer while leaving healthy cells intact? And what if federal bureaucrats were aware of this treatment, but deliberately withheld this information from the public?


In fact, the first experiment documenting pot’s potent anti-cancer effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest federal bureaucrats. The results of that study, reported in an Aug. 18, 1974, Washington Post newspaper feature, were that marijuana’s primary psychoactive component, THC, “slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent.”

Despite these favorable preliminary findings (eventually published the following year in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute), U.S. government officials refused to authorize any follow-up research until conducting a similar — though secret — preclinical trial in the mid-1990s. That study, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program to the tune of $2 million, concluded that mice and rats administered high doses of THC over long periods had greater protection against malignant tumors than untreated controls.

Here is a link to that study: Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids. Here is the header for that page:

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

1975 Sep;55(3):597-602.
Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids.
Munson AE, Harris LS, Friedman MA, Dewey WL, Carchman RA.

So the government has known this since no later than the end of 1975. And did its best to see that no follow ups were done.

Some more links on the suppression of this information:
U.S. Government Repressed Marijuana-Tumor Research

Nixon Knew Cannabis Cures Cancer, Suppressed the Findings in Leiu of War on Drugs

Medicinal Marijuana Cannabis Research Suppressed by Jeffrey Dach MD

Cannabis Continues to Eradicate Disease Despite Efforts to Suppress It

Cancer currently kills 586,000 Americans a year. The research could have been completed and medical distribution set up in 5 years. So we have had about 35 years of 500,000 Americans a year dying of cancer that didn’t need to. That is over 17 million deaths to keep Prohibition in place. That is right up there with Stalin, Mao, and the Austrian Corporal.

Cannabis cures cancer. Cancer kills 586,000 Americans every year. Republicans (generally) favor killing those people to keep Prohibition in place. Every Prohibitionist is complicit in mass murder.

Pass it on.


Skirt burning and other “jokes”

If you didn’t know what was going on, you might find this headline puzzling:

Teen given 7-year sentence for skirt-burning on Oakland bus

Huh? How could burning a skirt lead to to anyone receiving a 7 year sentence?

Because the perp didn’t just burn a skirt — any more than someone who sets fire to another person by holding a lighter to a shirt burns a shirt.

He deliberately set fire to another human being, and he’s getting off easy thanks to the victim’s parents.

The mother of an agender teen whose skirt was set aflame on an AC Transit bus in Oakland last year told the 17-year-old attacker Friday that he did a “horrible, terrible thing” but added, “We do not hate you.”

“Hate only leads to more hatred and anger,” Debbie Crandall told a teary-eyed Richard Thomas, moments before he was sentenced to seven years at a state juvenile center for severely burning 19-year-old Sasha Fleischman, who is now a student at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge.

“I’m hoping you gain some understanding in the years to come,” Crandall said.

Thomas did not speak in the Oakland courtroom, but his attorney, William Du Bois, told Judge Paul Delucchi, “What he thought was a prank exploded into a tragedy of major proportions.” Du Bois said outside court that his client “will be eternally sorry.”

Thomas was charged as an adult in connection with the Nov. 4, 2013, attack on Fleischman, who was then 18 and whose skirt was set on fire as the student slept — an attack that police said was partly motivated by homophobia.


Oakland police said in court documents that Thomas, a student at Oakland High School, admitted to lighting Fleischman’s garment on fire because he was “homophobic.” The teens were on an AC Transit bus on MacArthur Boulevard near Ardley Avenue, a few blocks from Fleischman’s home in the Glenview neighborhood.

In court Friday, Crandall told Thomas, “Maybe you just thought it was weird that Sasha was wearing a skirt. Maybe you thought the people around you thought it was funny.” But she described how she came to the scene and found her child writhing and shivering uncontrollably in pain, the teen’s legs “covered with black, charred patches of skin.”

At the time it happened, I was outraged by the callused attitude of the criminal:

I do not doubt that he thought it was funny. Lots of people have been tortured or murdered by attackers who had fun. But I don’t think finding amusement in such crimes is a defense. (And had he done the same thing to a sleeping dog or a cat, I doubt people would even for a moment entertain the “joke” defense.)

Well, now that the perp has gotten off with very little time, it strikes me that the “joke” defense actually works.


What will the jokers do next?

Humiliation, cutting elderly Jews' beards

I think that characterizing vicious conduct as a joke not only excuses nothing, but it makes it worse.



Big Money Here

Cannabinoid medicine if fully exploited could ultimately save the US $1 trillion a year. We should all be saying this. I’ll give you two diseases to start:

Cancer at $85 bn a year. About 2/3rds of diabetes at $115 bn a year. I’m sure I could find another $800 bn if I went through the whole list.


Oregon Doesn’t Like Illegal Immigrants

Oregon doesn’t like illegal immigrants by 2 to 1.

Oregon immigration vote is a warning for Obama.

Looks like Obama is going to have trouble with his base on this one.


How retarded we’ve become in our evolution

While this only kind of touches unintentionally on the squareness of hip, I kind of think this song is a nice all-around illustration of the concept.

From a 1977 concert, here’s DEVO’s “Mongoloid.”


They weren’t terribly worried about political correctness in those days, were they?

(Alas freedom. You never know it when you have it.)



Rape is unwanted sexual contact, right?

I was recently reminded of a hilarious film, “Colour Me Kubrick,” in which John Malkovich plays a Stanley Kubrick impostor who used his nonexistent “power” as a way of getting laid.

Here’s the trailer:

And a scene of him scoring in a gay bar:

Because they thought he was really Kubrick, they did whatever he wanted. As one of his “victims” (or is that the right word?) put it,

“They do say in Hollywood that the only way to the top is through the bottom.”

It’s easy to laugh at these idiots who thought they were bettering their careers by having sex with the Kubrick impostor, but for the sake of argument, let’s suppose the guy they were having sex with really was Kubrick. Would that make it rape?


What sort of sex is unwanted? Unwanted sex thought to have been wanted at the time, but soon discovered to have been unwanted? Or only unwanted sex which was found to be unwanted much later?


New Names And Other Dangers

Over at WUWT, commenters attempt to answer the Great Question of global warming. No, it’s not what sea levels will be in 2100, how to model water vapor and other feedbacks, or why the 18-year pause — no, this question is far more important: given their failure to model anything on Earth, what should we call the planet that climate models actually apply to?  My favorites among the efforts so far:

Goron Planet CMIP-6 Craven New World
Planet Phlogiston Fundraisia Modeltopia
Errorth Falsefidia Malingerth
Simulistan Misanthropia Crematoria
Manndora NIMBY Planet of the Japes
Gorphlogismann Grant Generator Foreboding Planet
Alarmistan Horsemannuearth Calamitous II
Catastrophia Warmworld Treeringia
Planet GIGO CRUtopia Fear Sphere
Grantlandia Hyperthermia Tamino
Thermophobia BESTworld Carbonerror
Errrth Settled Scientasia Terror Firma
Linear Simplistica Prognosticon Imaginearth
Planet Mirth Bristleconia Planet WTF-97
Dolos Manngaea Alarmaworld

Like any great work of science fiction, this nearly named world comes with its own set of rituals that seem very strange to us, but are doubtless perfectly normal to them.


Finding the square root of hip

A hipster I am not, and never have been. I might have been philosophically a hippie and a punk back in the day, and for years I was a Deadhead, but I always found myself annoyed by the trappings of people who want to be “in” and who worry that they might not be, because it is the essence of conformity.

However, there is a paradox in that trying to be like everyone else is like trying not to be like everyone else. I’ve long given up on trying to pin it down. To rebel is to conform, just as to conform is to rebel.

I used to wonder whether the whole thing could be reduced to a mathematical formula.

Only now, there is no need to wonder, because someone has done the math.

From “The Math Behind the Hipster Effect“:

If everyone always wants to look different than everybody else, everybody starts looking the same. At least, if you use a recently published mathematical model describing the phenomenon. And looking around here, it seems pretty accurate. Let me enlighten you with some math.

“The hipster effect is this non-concerted emergent collective phenomenon of looking alike trying to look different,” in the words of Jonathan Touboul, mathematical neuroscientist at the College de France in Paris, and author of the paper.

God, how effing tired.

How I don’t want to be like them!

(Shh! I had best be careful saying things like that, lest I fall into the same hall-of-mirrors trap into which they have fallen.)

Here’s the diagram.



Maybe the best way to avoid it is to ignore it entirely.

UPDATE: Many thank to Glenn Reynolds for the link, and a warm welcome to all!

But hmm

While I did not touch on the beard issue, I think it’s fair to point out that I grew a beard years ago out of financial despair — in the hope of gleaning sympathy from my at-the-time bearded creditors. The tactic seemed to work, as they let me walk away from a rather large debt. (Whether my beard was hip, straight, gay, or a form of toxic masculinity, I do not know. I shaved it off as soon as I could, for it made me look too much like Charles Manson, and frightened little girls on the street….)


I think I’d prefer the smell of napalm in the morning…

WARNING: It has been pointed out that this post is Not Safe For Work.

I am the last person in need of a reminder that human tastes vary widely, but a woman named Kim Kardashian seems to prove the point. Some love her, some hate her. I never would have even heard of the woman, as I don’t follow popular culture, but it just so happens that yesterday a friend asked me to please photoshop the head of another celebrity I’d never heard of onto the naked body of Kim Kardashian.

I can’t say no to a simple request like that, so here was the result:


No big deal for me. I have no strong feelings about either celebrity.

But see, now that my mind has been polluted with the unwanted knowledge of the existence of the thoroughly useless Kardashian woman, I now find myself unable to ignore new insights about her when I stumble onto them — like this video of a Kim Kardashian coffee dispenser:

That there is no accounting for taste was additionally drummed into my head as I walked the dog early this morning. A man got out of a slick new BMW and opened (a bit ostentatiously, so it seemed) both front doors in such a way that the sidewalk was blocked, so I had to walk out into the street. Not a big deal until the man walked over to the street side as I was attempting to avoid him and his stupid car, and then I caught a whiff.

Horrible, disgusting, cloying, overpowering cologne!

Honestly, I gagged, and nearly threw up involuntarily. No exaggeration. I just couldn’t help myself. Perhaps it was just too early in the morning. Anyway, I thought about the philosophical implications as I walked the dog. Earlier I had picked up and bagged a rather stinky dog turd. That didn’t bother me any more than usual, and I say that as someone who sincerely hates excrement. But cologne, OTOH, is supposed to be something people want to smell! People pay a lot of money for it and they wear it to make themselves more attractive. Yet it nearly made me vomit. Go figure. I’ll never understand these things.

No idea whether the cologne-wearing BMW driver likes Kim Kardashian, but nothing would surprise me.


Al Capone Times 50

The “Al Capone” remark comes about 50 seconds in.


Obamacare’s Huge Political Advantage

It was based on lies.


Happy Veterans Day!

Today is Veterans Day, and while it has a long history, the important thing is to remember and honor those who served.

My dad was a World War II veteran, as were many of his friends, but unfortunately there are fewer and fewer of them around to thank.

My co-blogger is a veteran, however, and he is very much around.

So thank you, M. Simon.

And that goes for all other veterans.


Thou shalt not covet

Another day, another favorite Youtube video taken down (as usual, for “copyright” infringement).

Patent royalty claims are invading the 3d printing community.

I cannot shop online without later being spammed to death by Google ads offering me what I already bought, or decided NOT to buy.

Under the guise of protecting the environment, cities are conning rural land owners into selling their development rights to cities. The dishonest way the phrase “development rights” is misused is appalling. There is a conscious effort to make people think that a purchase of development rights means that the rights are extinguished, and the property is somehow “protected.”Why does it take a lawyer to understand that whoever owns the development rights has a right to develop the land, and that cities can — and will — develop it?

In 2010, when Ann Arbor bought development rights to pristine land known as the Nixon Farm, people naturally thought it was being “preserved.”

Now — a mere four years later — the city wants to build 1200 units on it:

Nearby residents still aren’t convinced.

“We’re going to be destroying a lot of natural areas, face it,” said Roger Kuhlman, who lives in the subdivision immediately west of Nixon Farm South.

“To me, that’s a pretty strange kind of environmentalism, to go out and add a lot of people to the city, destroy wetlands.”

Poor fools. They just don’t get that whoever has the development rights has the right to develop. The city of Ann Arbor is a huge developer, but more crooked, because it pretends to be just the opposite. Development is one thing, but development in the name of opposing development is positively Orwellian. As to why people continuing to fall for this nonsense, who knows? Where’s the Sierra Club? Why aren’t greenie weenies howling in protest? Are they being paid off?

But I digress from my rant.

MBAs scheme over how to get more money from consumers for ever-shoddier merchandise. The price of lightbulbs has risen from cents to many dollars, and the waste is now toxic (in the name of “the environment”). Portion sizes are deliberately decreased for the same product while the price remains the same or higher (in the name of “health.”)

I see continual attempts to pick my pocket by government and big business (as if that’s a distinction anymore) and of course complain about it all the time impotently.

This morning is no different, except I had an additional revelation so disturbingly obvious that it shouldn’t have warranted “revelation” status.

Everybody wants someone else’s money. 

The rest is just how to get it.

That’s pretty much it, although I realize there are exceptions, because there will always be saints, altruists, hermits, and principled kooks. But unless they are independently wealthy, even they will want money from somewhere. It is a hopeless human condition, and it has led to “entitlement” based schemes like socialism, welfare statism, communism, or the much devalued “work ethic” which posits that if you work hard enough, you will have “earned” the money others give to you. All are systems of morality which underlie man’s attempt to grapple with the problem of wanting other people’s money.

Naturally, whether you earned your money by hard work or had it extracted from others and then handed to you out of “entitlement,” whatever you get is never enough. And just as naturally, others will try to extract as much of it from you as they possibly can.

That’s the human playing field. No wonder the Communists killed so many people in their fruitless attempt to rejigger the game.


Where The Sun Don’t Shine

This is going to hurt: World’s largest solar plant applying for federal grant to pay off federal loan.

After already receiving a controversial $1.6 billion construction loan from U.S. taxpayers, the wealthy investors of a California solar power plant now want a $539 million federal grant to pay off their federal loan.


Ivanpah is the largest concentrated solar power plant in the world. It was unveiled in February with great fanfare. Dr. Ernest Moniz, the U.S. Secretary of Energy, justified taxpayers’ investment at the time, saying, “We want to be technology leaders. It’s good for our economy and it’s also good for helping stimulate the global transition to low carbon.”

But since then the plant has not lived up to its clean energy promise. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the plant produced only about a quarter of the power it’s supposed to, a disappointing 254,263 megawatt-hours of electricity from January through August, not the million megawatt-hours it promised.

A NRG spokesman blamed the weather, saying the sun didn’t shine as often as years of studies predicted.

Really? So not only does it fry birds in mid air. It is not economically viable as an electricity producer.

From the article, the people asking for taxpayer money say “the money is there for the taking.” Well yes. And guess who gets took?

Update: This comment on the technical details is interesting.

A snippet from the comment:

…for the full 8 Months of operation, this plant has delivered only 254GWH of power from all three units.

That works out to a Capacity Factor of, umm, wait for it, 11.4%, which equates to 2 hours and 44 minutes a day averaged across that full 8 Months.

And it gets worse. The plant is shut down in the winter.


A Climate Of Failure

From Jo Nova.

Australians may have missed what happened this week in the US (especially if they only watch the ABC). Climate Change is over as a voting issue. Will Australian Opposition Leader, Bill Shorten, get the message? Just last month he pledged to put carbon trading on the next election agenda (again). The conservatives across the nation must be cheering.

In the US, Tom Steyer threw $74 million into a campaign to convince voters to be very afraid and vote out the Republicans. Nearly all of Steyers favourite candidates failed. It was no accidental issue. The NextGen Climate Action Super Pac took Steyers money, and spent it all (and more) to push President Obama’s green agenda, specifically targeting coal “for extinction”. The Republicans supported energy of all kinds from coal to oil, fracked gas, and more pipelines.

This was the “biggest investment the environmental community has ever made in politics”, and yet it failed dismally:

[Washington Post] The spending plans are laid out in a document, acquired by The Post, that summarizes the activities of five top green groups — the Environmental Defense Action Fund, Steyer’s NextGen Climate, the NRDC Action Fund, the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), and the Sierra Club – and has been circulated internally among them. Asked about the document, which is dated October 17, LCV president Gene Karpinski commented, “this is by far the biggest investment that the environmental community has ever made in politics.” Karpinski said that LCV will spend over $25 million this year, compared with $5 million in the 2010 election cycle and $15 million in 2012.

Links at the link.


A Deficiency Disease

The study the video is based on:

Reductions in circulating endocannabinoid levels in individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder following exposure to the World Trade Center attacks.


Endocannabinoid (eCB) signaling has been identified as a modulator of adaptation to stress, and is integral to basal and stress-induced glucocorticoid regulation. Furthermore, interactions between eCBs and glucocorticoids have been shown to be necessary for the regulation of emotional memories, suggesting that eCB function may relate to the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).


This report shows that PTSD is associated with a reduction in circulating levels of the eCB 2-AG. Given the role of 2-AG in the regulation of the stress response, these data support the hypothesis that deficient eCB signaling may be a component of the glucocorticoid dysregulation associated with PTSD. The negative association between AEA levels and intrusive symptoms is consistent with animal data indicating that reductions in AEA promote retention of aversive emotional memories. Future work will aim to replicate these findings and extend their relevance to clinical pathophysiology, as well as to neuroendocrine and molecular markers of PTSD.

THC is the plant analog for anandamide. Canabidiol (CBD) is the plant analog for 2-AG.

BTW THC and cannabidiol (CBD) together are effective against at least some (all?) cancers. You can look it up.

Another NIH study looks directly at endocannabinoid deficiency.

Clinical endocannabinoid deficiency (CECD) revisited: can this concept explain the therapeutic benefits of cannabis in migraine, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome and other treatment-resistant conditions?


Subsequent research has confirmed that underlying endocannabinoid deficiencies indeed play a role in migraine, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome and a growing list of other medical conditions. Clinical experience is bearing this out. Further research and especially, clinical trials will further demonstrate the usefulness of medical cannabis. As legal barriers fall and scientific bias fades this will become more apparent.

Note the “As … scientific bias fades“. There is a lot of prejudice out there. But the prejudiced are dying off. And currently they are being outvoted.

Persecuting people for a deficiency disease is not nice. In fact it is criminal.

It is the Prohibitionists who are the real criminals. Heh.

And of the two parties it is the Republicans who are the most criminal. Repent.


Being Watched

The experiments now going on in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, and that other Washington (D.C.) are being watched by politicians who are trying to figure out which way to jump on the cannabis legalization issue. Here is one who admits it:

Wolf would sign legislation to legalize marijuana for broader medicinal purposes. He supports decriminalizing possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, but wants to study the experience of states where it is legal before deciding whether to support legalizing the sale of marijuana for recreational use.

That would be Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania, a Democrat, who has just won election for Governor of Pennsylvania in a very Republican year.


The Marijuana Majority

Marijuana got a majority in every State (and DC) where it was on the ballot. Preliminary results:

Florida – 57% in favor of Medical Cannabis (it needed 60% to pass).

Oregon – legalization got 54% of the vote. That makes it the third State to legalize.

Alaska – legalization got 52% of the vote. That makes it the fourth State to legalize.

Washington DC – legalization got 69% of the vote. It will be interesting to see how Congress deals with that.

The Republican Party – the Prohibitionist Party – has a problem. When Medical Cannabis came up for a vote in the House earlier this year 170 Democrats supported it and only 49 Republicans supported it. The bill, sponsored by Republican US Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), passed 218 to 189. Which means it got 53.5% of those voting.

It will be interesting to see what the Republican majority in Congress does about these new measures. Especially DC.


An Era Of Strong Man Politics Returns

China. The article’s title is China’s Third Era: The End of Reform, Growth, and Stability. This is the ending:

Events are still unfolding, but we don’t have to wait for history to tell us what’s happening in China today. Three decades of stability and progress have come to an end. Deng’s China is now in the past, and the third era of the People’s Republic, which bears a chilling resemblance to the first one, has just begun.

You should read the whole thing. And if you are doing manufacturing in China perhaps you should reconsider.


CO2 Can’t Heat The Oceans

This was brought to my attention by Ocean IR Emissivity Paper agrees with Talkshop. I won’t bore you with the gloating there. Instead lets get to the meat: New paper finds a huge false physical assumption of IPCC climate models.

For all four of these physical reasons (and more)

* poor absorption by water of IR from greenhouse gases

* good reflection by water surfaces of IR from greenhouse gases

* penetration depth of water by IR from greenhouse gases of only a few microns, which causes evaporative cooling of the ocean skin surface

* cooling of the ocean skin surface by the minority of IR from greenhouse gases that is absorbed rather than reflected

ocean warming can only be related to solar activity and modulators of sunshine at the surface like clouds, and not increased IR radiation from increased greenhouse gases.

This is a death knell for conventional climate models, which falsely assume the opposite of the four physical reasons above, thus falsely claiming IR from greenhouse gases can heat the oceans (70% of Earth’s surface area) and where allegedly 90% of the “missing heat” has gone. This is impossible for the physical reasons noted above, and this new paper adds additional physical reasons why. As the authors find, the false emissivity/absorptivity assumptions of climate models results in a huge difference in model projections of Arctic temperatures by 2C after only 25 years, but the authors are apparently unaware of the reasons why only solar wavelengths can account for ocean warming/cooling, not IR from greenhouse gases.

If you hang around here much you know that I have been pretty much a solar only guy for the last few years and before that I was a lukewarmist (CO2 will heat the planet but not by much). It looks more and more like CO2 in the atmosphere changes nothing. The long version of that is: water vapor is already doing the absorbing and the water vapor bands are saturated. So even if CO2 is a warming gas it is very minor because most of the frequencies where it absorbs energy are already covered by water vapor.