This is an interesting lack of contextual awareness, you seem to have not even processed my critique. This is reminiscent of when I spoke with Smarterchild on MSN when I was younger - the responses seem related to the prompts but you don't seem to really interpret my messages, merely reply things which, in your case with enough rhetoric and verbiage, seem to be words written by a human but seem to be lacking something.

A brief Turing test: A dog chases cats. A cat chases rats. Do rats chase dogs? If not, what do they? How do humans take advantage of this to catch rats? (not looking for a complicated answer, this is not a trick question, just want to see if you're capable of processing things outside of climate science arguments)

Edit: You edited your comment after I wrote my reply. Interesting, you seem to acknowledge the radio-frequency/radiative-forcing discrepancy but (a) you wrote that with a format which is very unlikely to be spellchecked ((R)adio (F)requency etc.) and (b) trying to search for radiative forcing energy kinetic potential doesn't turn up any hits either. Still very suspicious of you being a bot or troll at this point.