Correlation doesn't imply causation. But we have casual and testable mechanisms to validate these theories and what we're seeing. We can measure the greenhouse effect directly by experiment.

I hear your argument, Earth's been hotter millions of years ago, sure, but that doesn't invalidate human climate change at all.

[–] Decompose@programming.dev -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I have a PhD in physics. I spent half of my life in labs doing measurements and calculating systematic and statistical errors on them in an experiment that collects data over years to get a single number. A good chunk of my thesis is on how to properly estimate errors in measurements that are years long. I have even worked with complicated concepts like propagating errors through mathematical models to minimize them.

No you don't have measurements to validate anything. You have "this line goes up, this other line goes up, and we think we can explain it with green house nonsense, and hence the correlation coefficient is 1.00000", and hence we caused it. You think I haven't seen this nonsense? 99.99% of the people have no idea what the hell they're talking about.

Yes, earth went hotter and colder million times before. This invalidates climate change. We have no proof, not even statistical, that humans caused anything. We only have political agendas and research groups who get funding if they agree to come to that result. And we have dumb people who don't understand basic logic or can add two fractions parrot what the television says in fear.