Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
Sure, here you go:
It would help your case to provide peer reviewed articles, or articles that reference them. Also, your references aren't linking to the graphs to place them within any context.
www.climate.gov (this source defends the theory of AWG https://www.climate.gov/news-feature...sked-questions)

https://upload.wikimedia.org (nothing there? )
http://hot-topic.co.nz https://cdn.zmescience.com (articles in zmescience seems in line with the consensus just by entering global warming into the search, other not sure stance)
http://geotallis.weebly.com http://humanorigins.si.edu http://www.lakepowell.net http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com http://www.oism.org/ http://www.co2science.org http://worldview3.50webs.com

I'm not seeing any hard data that demonstrates that a natural cycle is the cause of the current warming cycle. Many of these links provide undermine your own opinion. They recognize that the earth has been warmer and cooler in the past, but they also accept current warming by greenhouse gas emissions. The cycles have their own scientific explanations, and there is no pattern over the larger geological timescale(hundreds of millions of years) that can explain the current warming AND the high warming rate. Yes, the rate is very significant, because there isn't anything "natural" that is known to be driving the rapid change. We are clearly entering the age of Industrial global warming, created by ours truly.