I can verify the highlighted text above as true.You will have to clarify what you mean by overall picture. The scientific community is focused on anthropogenic CO2. Its not the absolute numbers so much but the ratio of sources to sinks. The relatively small contribution of atmospheric CO2 from human related activities (compared to global CO2 flux from natural sources) is driving a net increase over what, geologically, is a small period of time. It clearly emerges as the forcing variable in global energy budget modelling, the latest iteration of which is the CMIP5. A complete list of simulations run through CMIP5 leading up to AR5 can be found here. I am also attaching the AR5 carbon cycle graphic that shows net sources and sinks for atmospheric CO2.
http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/docs/Taylor_CMIP5_design.pdf
AR5 is a document intended for the public and, in particular, policy makers. I've heard it said that the summaries are written according to the average time it takes for a legislator to take a dump. I know he's a busy man, but maybe our friend Bernie Sanders will stop by and tell us if that is true.
View attachment 91
Its also a pretty picture.