If you don't have confidence in the IPCC's model, then why did you post that graph?
You don't see any plausible reason for the negative feedback in his alternative climate model. But I'm sure he had a good reason to put that in the model. We would have to read his paper published in Hungary to find the reason. It's not easy to deduce what the reason is because climate science is so complex. There are all kinds of physical processes going on in our atmosphere: reflection and absorption of EMR, transfers of heat from the atmosphere to land and seas, radiation of heat away from the earth by the atmosphere, land, and oceans, etc.. It's not simple and it's very difficult to model correctly. That's why we need to stop cap and trade immediately until we get the science completely figured out.
Then there are all the physical processes involved in CO2 transfers between the atmosphere and soil and between the atmosphere and oceans. There are hundreds of assumptions in these models and if just one key assumption is substantially in error, then all the forecasts produced by the model can be totally wrong. That’s what has happened with the IPCC’s model, except that model has numerous errors.
The reason they can't just put in feedback is that it depends on the concentration of water vapor. Higher concentrations, especially at higher altitudes, are warming. More diffuse water vapor is warming. OTOH, concentrated water vapor turns into rain and is cooling. Concentrated convection also dries the upper troposphere and is cooling. I think the biggest gap in your list of heat transfer and his equations is convection. Convection is really about weather. I agree with your last sentence 100%.