They are part of it. We learned that in grade school science. James Hansen admitted that the main reason that his climate models failed is because he could not accurately compute the future was because of the randomness of the cloud cover.
I wish you would ask your questions in a way that is somewhat less fanatic. You are doing yourself a disservice. The only possible correct answer can be no, wile the subject is far more interesting...
C's video is actually very good in answering the question you should have asked. Clouds certainly do have an effect on the amount of energy that is retained, both positive and negative. This is discussed at skeptical science dot com.
"For climate scientists who are skeptical that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions will cause a dangerous amount of warming, such as Richard Lindzen and Roy Spencer, their skepticism hinges mainly on this cloud cover uncertainty. They tend to believe that as the planet warms, low-level cloud cover will increase, thus increasing planetary albedo (overall reflectiveness of the Earth), offsetting the increased greenhouse effect and preventing a dangerous level of global warming from occurring. [1]"
Most people would have noticed that while a cloudy day is cooler then a sunny day. However fewer people realize that this is the total opposite after the sun sets as a cloudy night is warmer then a clear night. [2] Clive Best is focusing on the effects of cloud cover during the day which might make it appealing to those who have never thought why it is warmer on a cloudy night...
Clouds influence global climate far more than C02. but the effect they have varies with the type of clouds thin wispy clouds have a warming effect heavy thick clouds have a cooling effect. But nobody is going to agree that raising taxis is a good idea because it is cloudy.
Roy Spencer thinks so.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/
I'm skeptical of his claims. But unlike when denialists talk about James Hansen or Michael Mann, I won't lower my self to denegrate him with ad homs. If he is proven right, I would congradulate him.
AGW cultists will never believe clouds regulate climate just like they refuse to believe the solar cycles in the sun impact climate (even though the IPCC has begun to somewhat acknowledge this). That's what make AGW more of a religion than a science.
They don't control the climate, because their formation is controlled by climate. However, they can have an effect, by reducing solar radiation to the ground below, or by carrying and depositing water in the form of rain, snow, etc
Why would you ask a ridiculous question like this when you know they don't
