OK. What part is false? Anyone can claim what I said is false. What Part?
Your claims on TOA emissions and what the notch represents is false. End of story mate. Energy up to 73 WM-2 is absorbed by mostly WV in the first few meters. No back radiation Occurs as it is simply smothered by kinetically mad ADHD kids sucking the life out of those gases that have pretty well absorbed all energy that is possible to be absorbed. Very little is left to be absorbed.
Then you cited the ScienceDirect paper that discusses absorption coefficients as some form of proof on GHG warming. But that paper makes no references to Emissions or otherwise known as BACK RADIATION.
Mate. Get your HEAD around this. BACK RADIATION does not occur at the surface. Sure there is the odd 1 in a 100,000 event of an excited CO2 molecule that does manage to get a photon out. Hardly anything worthwhile getting a woody over is it.
