Still, we must protect our environment. Pollution is horrible and it needs to be addressed.
Or the other option, that your political understanding of the world is lacking?
That's not really relevant, is it? The issues with the climate change happening now is that it is man-made, and that we've built most of our civilization around the assumption that the climate was either not changing, or was changing very slowly.
If something was causing increase flooding in, say, Nebraska, would you bring up that Nebraska was hundreds of meters below water 100 million years ago? If an arsonist were setting wildfires in your your near inhabited areas, would you bring up that there have been wildfires for hundreds of thousands of years due to lighting?
And yes, we know that most of the present day climate change is man-made, because we know that most of the CO2 increase in the atmosphere during industrial times is man-made. We know that because CO2 that comes from burning fossil fuels and plants has a different isotope makeup than CO2 that comes from other sources.
The higher the expertise of the climatologist the more likely they are to agree as well. Or, only the incompetent ones disagree.
Coin flips are independent events. Daily temperatures are not.
Click the sub-heading for "Monthly Mean Global Surface Temperature", which will show the line graph/data for the temperature difference for a given month compared to the mean for 1951-1980.
> Q. Why does GISS stay with the 1951-1980 base period?
> A. The primary focus of the GISS analysis are long-term temperature changes over many decades and centuries, and a fixed base period yields anomalies that are consistent over time.
> Q. Why does GISS show no data from before 1880?
> A. The analysis is limited to the period since 1880 because of poor spatial coverage of stations and decreasing data quality prior to that time. Meteorological station data provide a useful indication of temperature change in the Northern Hemisphere extratropics for a few decades prior to 1880, and there are a small number of station records that extend back to previous centuries. However, we believe that analyses for these earlier years need to be carried out on a station by station basis with an attempt to discern the method and reliability of measurements at each station, a task beyond the scope of our analysis. Global studies of still earlier times depend upon incorporation of proxy measures of temperature change like tree rings, ice core data, etc.
What we have with climate is more like your neighbor appearing with two wives two months ago, with thirty wives one month ago, and today he has sixty wives and maybe a few husbands. Still waiting to verify if something is not right?
The current political "climate" makes very improbable that we'll achieve "only 2 deg in 2100" target that the politicians mention but don't do enough -- compare with how much easier were had we started in 2000: