Since temperature is an intensive thermodynamic variable, isn't it meaningless to discuss climate change in terms of global temperature change?

 https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-concentration-of-CO2-in-the-atmosphere-when-it-becomes-saturated-and-adding-more-CO2-would-have-no-additional-effect-on-global-warming

My reply:

Try ZERO. Despite all the degreed “climate scientists” and their inbred papers, CO2 has no effect on Earth’s surface temperatures because it’s part of the atmosphere, whose great mass creates a gravity field taking all of the Sun’s heat away from the surface to space via convection and radiation. Even if the atmosphere had zero CO2, it would keep the surface temperature within livable limits as compared to the Moon. This is what’s happening on Venus with its 90 atmospheres of pressure, and the CO2-rich atmosphere is irrelevant. The temperature profile in the sky is always lower than the surface because it contains only part of the surface’s energy, and adiabatic expansion causes it to cool as it ascends. The CO2 greenhouse warming theory is a hoax that confuses the surface where we live with the sky where we don’t, just like smoke and heat from a chimney  takes the heat away from the cooking pot and can never return to cook the meal twice.  Sorry, the iron laws of thermodynamics trump all the other physics involved and rule out heating of the surface by CO2 in the sky. If your forte is physics, read my devastating essay destroying the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever, listed on my profile.