Regarding your ice core data, I'm certainly not arguing that the current CO2 levels don't have
a dominant human contribution!
Not exact matches
E.g. of those abstracts making a statement about the quantitative
contribution of
human activity to the warming, 87 % (65/75) endorsed
dominant human causation.
Based on an extensive literature review, we suggest that (1) climate warming occurs with great uncertainty in the magnitude of the temperature increase; (2) both
human activities and natural forces contribute to climate change, but their relative
contributions are difficult to quantify; and (3) the
dominant role of the increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases (including CO2) in the global warming claimed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is questioned by the scientific communities because of large uncertainties in the mechanisms of natural factors and anthropogenic activities and in the sources of the increased atmospheric CO2 concentration.
While
humans without doubt impact our environment, why would we now suddenly assume that our
contribution is the
dominant factor, when current changes are clearly within the range of historical changes where we could have had no impact.