Bigger picture:

- we have no idea what 'normal' climate variation is, on the scale of decades (which is the relevant scale). All data proxies (from before thermometers - eg tree rings and ice cores) are smoothed so that level of detail is lost. Plus they are absolutely awful data. (Plus thermometer data is awful for a ton of reasons...). So there is no basis whatsoever for saying that what's happening now is unnatural.

- what does "global temperature" even mean? It's not the average temp of the earth (which is a 3D sphere containing quite a lot of molten metal!). So it's some definition of "the surface".. ..but which bits? At what altitude? And do yo use a grid? But we don't have a grid of observations so you have to interpolate - and there are a ton of ways to do this. ..and what if you use a different grid? The more you think of it the more stupid and meaningless it is. The only remotely meaningful measure is total energy stored in the oceans - as any temp variation that could affect surface life is going to be driven by this. But nobody is interested in total ocean energy (it is increasing at a tiny rate and doesn't seem obviously to correlate to human activity).

The whole thing is a nonsense as soon as you start thinking critically about it.