Just curious about the article:

How does citing the fact that temperatures were warmer in the past invalidate that the claim that we’re currently in a warming trend with possible man-made contributions?  Nobody is arguing that manmade causes are the ONLY contributers to global climate change.  Citing the warmer period in the dark ages doesn’t disprove anything.  It was also a lot warmer when the Earth was taking on its solid form from its original molten mass during planet accretion 4.7 billion years ago.  Does that somehow invalidate the theory of man’s contribution to climate change?

Logic:  “It can’t be getting hot due to man’s actions, because it was hotter in the past, when man had less ability to make it hot!”
Implied assumption:  The only thing that can make it hotter is man’s actions.

Is anybody actually reading the articles they post?