One of the arguments given by the global warming community when challenged about the recent warming being man-made is that although there have been equally warm periods in historical times, the RATE at which we are seeing warming now is “unprecedented.” In other words, if we were to plot global temperatures over “recent” decades it would show a rising slope unmatched in earlier warming events. Of course these statements usually go unchallenged by the media but thanks to the internet such claims are easily testable and the results easily transmitted. Reproduced below are two graphs. One shows the temperature anomalies for the period from 1895 to 1946 and the other shows the temperature anomalies for the period from 1957 to the present. Notice that there is a slight cooling trend at the ends of each graph. More importantly, notice that the overall slope of the two graphs is pretty much identical. In fact, I will not even tell you which graph is which. You can figure it out with a little research (hint: there is a tell-tale 1997-98 super El Nino event on one of the graphs).
Both are scaled the same (each line on the y-axis is 0.2C, each x-axis division is 5 years) — in fact, both are clips from the exact same image—provided by the Hadley CRUT3 chart showing the global monthly mean temperature anomalies. Be aware that the global levels of CO2 in the period from 1895-1946 were relatively level while the rise in CO2 from 1957 to the present is supposedly “unprecedented.” Of course their quantum jump in logic is that this recent unprecedented rate in warming must be caused by the corresponding unprecedented rise in CO2. Well, take a look for yourself!
It would be preferable to compare the slope of the rise during the onset of the medieval warm period to the modern supposed rise, but the degree of resolution in the earlier period needed to make that comparison is just not very reliable.
So which graph shows the rate of global warming from 1895 to 1947 and which one shows the rate from 1957 to the present?