Why Radiation before Thermodynamics?

What sets the lapse rate and thus the global Earth surface temperature? There are two competing ideas:

1. thermodynamics with gravitation under radiative forcing
2. radiative equilibrium with thermodynamics adjustment.

In short: 1. thermodynamics or 2. radiation?

The "greenhouse effect" of CO2 alarmism is based on 2, but the science of 2. is missing.

On the other hand 1. makes sense from a scientific mathematical point of view.

That politicians may believe in 2. is understandable, but how is it possible that scientists gathered in Royal Academies also buy 2. when it is very clear that science does not?

Why do scientists not buy 1. Because it is wrong? No. Because thermodynamics is feared by scientists as a subject beyond comprehension, with its 2nd Law about entropy which nobody

claims to understand.

But there is a version of thermodynamics without entropy which anyone with a bit of incentive can understand, presented in Basic Thermodynamics of the Atmosphere and in more detail in Computational Thermodynamics.

So with a proper understanding of thermodynamics 1. makes a lot of sense, and the more you

understand the more silly 2. appears.

Why buy something cheap and simple which does not work, when the real thing is there if you just open your mind to grab it?