// [Earth]'s average surface temperature is around 60 degrees Celsius. //
OK, what? It really isn't remotely true that Earth's average temperature is 60 degrees Celsius. Are you sure you didn't mean Fahrenheit?
There are tonnes of references on the link between CO2 and temperature in the IPCC reports, of course. You're welcome to read them. The most cogent summary would be this one:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ar4-wg1-chapter1.pdf
See also references therein. Note also that the Intensity of solar radiation of earth is only maximally 1000W/m^2, not constantly that -- the actual average is 342W/m^2 , as shown in the figure, because you (and your sources) forgot that only half of the Earth is illuminated at any given time. Ditto the other planets. Even Mars' atmosphere, though it may be mostly CO2, is also tiny compared to Earth's: 200 times smaller, so that the actual difference in CO2 concentration is only a factor 10 in Mars' favour.
It has been calculated that the Earth's temperature would be permanently 30 degrees Celsius cooler if there were no greenhouse gases present. Again, I am struggling to understand why you insist that there is no link between the presence of greenhouse gases and temperature. It is an established fact that there is a link; it's been demonstrated that CO2 responds in the necessary way to infrared radiation in order for there to be such a link. It may well be that the "temperature budget" is weighted in favour of other factors -- no-one would pretend that the Earth's temperature would stay as it is if the Sun disappeared -- but it is utterly nonsensical to insist that there is no link at all. You can play your numbers game all you like, lie-in, but it's clear that you don't know how to use the numbers, and you can't even be bothered to check your own sources for blatant errors.
There's only one person on this thread with an agenda.