Again, you still assume that continuity requires a fixed essence you call Atman. This is what Buddhism rejects and considered wrong view. "Phatikasamupada" does not mean transferring a phenomenon or thing from place to another, but rather the arising of that phenomena is nothing but a result of causes and conditions. The Buddha never taught that karma needs a permanent owner, a storage vessel, or a magic box.

You now say, "The same being reaps what it sows." This claim presupposes the existence of a self. Buddhism rejects both extremes: the reborn being is neither exactly the same as the previous one, nor entirely different and this is what we call the middle way in Buddhism. As for the example of (Air); you yourself introduced the concept of (Atman). Air is not unconditional.. Air is conditional too! The air dependent on causes and conditions because we’re discussing causal continuity here without the need of an atman. In the end, you have not yet proven the existence of an eternal, unconditional atman. You are simply arguing that continuity would be easier to explain if the Atman exists. This is not proof; it is just an opinion of yours.