I like your way of explaining the conventional science Ricky, its a very human, relateable story, beautifully presented. Well done. For me your stories are always worth 50 claps, even if I don't agree with some things, its a learning process we are collectively going through, and we need to collaborate.
I was going to try to explain here why there appears to be a fundamental error in the conventional scientific view of greenhouse gases, which actually could turn out to be existential if not corrected, and the reason why the theory is failing to predict the actual temperature rises measured.
But its a lengthy explanation that probably needs pictures to communicate more clearly.
So, if you are OK with me doing this, I will respond with an article directly related to your story, referencing your story, rather than try to explain it here.
I get why the errors have been made, its not your fault, or actually even the fault of any human.
The controversial, but very benevolent part, as far as we humans are concerned, is that we have to assign responsibility to the system itself, an emergent property which is actually live, fiendishly clever and has will, displayed by what it does, rather than what it might say.
Failiing to recognise it could be the biggest mistake we ever make, so I promise to clarify.