This study also says this:
and this...
And finally, this...
So... it looks to me like you are making calculations that are similar to what your own citation says you can't do.
:lamo
Finally, you post something useful,
The impact of entirely removing CO2 is almost 7 times the impact of doubling CO2, underlining the highly nonlinear nature of the forcing due to CO2 concentration change over this range.
let's discuss this for a second and where the 7 times comes from.
Of the 33°C, CO2 is said to account for up to 26%, 8.58°C, now 8.58°C/7=1.22°C, so each doubling of CO2 has the potential of 1.22°C.
If we start from 1 ppm of CO2
step 1 1ppm to 2ppm 1.22°C
step 2 2ppm to 4ppm 1.22°C
step 3 4ppm to 8ppm 1.22°C
step 4 8ppm to 16ppm 1.22°C
step 5 16ppm to 32 ppm 1.22°C
step 6 32ppm to 64 ppm 1.22C
step 7 64ppm to 128ppm 1.22°C
step 8 128ppm to 256ppm 1.22°C
Depending on where you start we are right in line with almost 7 times the impact,and yes it demonstrates that CO2 is on a doubling curve.
The models vary according to what is used for sensitivity input, Schmidt is going to be in lockstep with Hansen in 2006,
and his model included a feedback factor equal to an 2% increase in solar output, that has never been seen in any evidence