Sorry, but none of what you’ve cited is a credible resource regarding climate change. I keep reading on AvWeb the often-repeated claim that CO2 and water vapor have some spectral overlap limiting the warming effect- this is false. Water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, but it is the pronounced change in CO2 leading to increasing forcing in the energy budget. This is a very complicated physics problem and understandable that one could be swayed by misinformation.
A layperson description can be found here: climate.nasa. gov/ask-nasa-climate/3143/steamy-relationships-how-atmospheric-water-vapor-supercharges-earths-greenhouse-effect/
For an actual, peer-reviewed review paper I’d recommend: doi. org/10.1016/j.endeavour.2016.07.002
*Source: I am a professional scientist and I use spectroscopy tools in my research lab. I am not a climate scientist but I use the same physics to understand how light interacts with living tissue. I love aviation and I agree there are plenty of proposed “snake oil” solutions to reducing CO2 emissions. We can and should debate skeptically about these. I find this hybrid solution proposed in the article far more credible than any near-term, electric only solution for transport category aircraft, for example.
**Climate change due to elevated CO2 in the atmosphere is the overwhelming consensus of nearly all credible scientists today. Uncertainty remains over long-term predictions, and what to be done about CO2 emissions remains a political question open for debate. However, the underlying science is not up for debate, regardless of whatever confirmation-bias supporting (and non peer-reviewed) websites you bring up.
Edit- removed hypertext