Allow me to help you. First let’s delineate the two different meanings of the concept of heat associated with radiant transfer between objects:
1) To absorb energy and have the molecules of the entity excited as a result
2) To have the measurable temperature of an entity increased as a result of an influx of energy.
Only the second of these two has any relevance to the laws of thermodynamics. The first does not.
Using #1 heating goes both ways, because energy goes both ways.
Using #2 heating only goes one way, from hotter to cooler.
You misunderstood something and you’ve been trying to force the square peg of #1 into the round hole of the second law of thermodynamics. Try putting the round peg of #2 into the round hole of the second law and you will find it works much better. And then you won’t have to embarrass yourself pretending to understand something you don’t.
Don’t waste too much time beating yourself up about this, Joe. You made an honest mistake. Apologize and forget about it. It doesn’t change the fact that global warming is still nonsense. Nor does any of this substantiate concerns that CO2 increases back radiation.
Where do severe storms get their energy from?
Doswellian Lunacy Prevails in the Cult of Meteorology/Tornadogenesis