1. Wrong. AGW is a culture created by those who believe human beings are evil and the world was better off before they arrived. Every effort over the last 120 years has been made to push this religion on the world and government policies, climate sciences use of proxies, averages and dishonest or manipulated data sets is just the modern way for them to convince people to join the religion.
2. Thinking that one data set, controlled by one set of people, altered by like-minded people and literally limited in access to those same people is not fact. That is a controlled narrative, aka fiction being sold as fact. Their work has not been reproduced in any other data set, they even tried to do it an failed in the 90s but refuse to admit it publically or re-try.
3. True, no one model has predicted anything to a reliably significant degree of accuracy.
As far as your assertions:
1. Stop being a condescending ass.
2. Most of the energy coming from the sun is not in the visible light range. Why are you focusing on the visible range?
3. No, not true in all cases. Some collisions can amplify to blue light.
4. Most gasses absorb light, why specifically target Infrared when there is a huge spectrum?
5. Unless you have accurately measured all sources, then this has not been tested. It has been ESTIMATED, but not measured to an accuracy that can be regarded as fact (except by those who want it to be fact regardless).
You're last question, prove it is being trapped. The rolling averages over the last thirty years prove otherwise. CO2 and greenhouse gases have increased significantly but temperatures have declined or stalled in most regions. In fact, since 1998, when the 10 year average from 1987, which had a drastic reduction of temperature sensors across the globe and full swap over to satellite systems that were hit by a massive solar storm that same year, ended and showed no increase since should garner a pause in thinking the data has not been as accurate as suggested.
