It's all in record. CO2 levels are in the ice cores they sample, thousands of years of data. We have graphed the cycles, and it goes nearly vertical on the chart over the past century
.
Yes, there always nstusl cycles, the earth emits methane and CO2 naturally, and things change gradually (over 10's of thousands of years). This gives nature time to adapt and evolve. For us, right now, it is happening so rapidly, we cannot adapt so quickly. Building dams to withhold floods, trying to strengthen the power grid with solar, wind & hydro to deal with higher usage if A/C in himes because the temps are so high that heat-related deaths are among the biggest killers of humans. It's a cycle that is now in an exponential climb. More ice melts, less ice caps available to reflect sun (they are white) and more dark blue ocean to absorb heat. Currents in the ocean ste being slowed by the cold, melting ice cap water, which is detrimental (The Day After Tomorrow movie wasn't that far off!).
Just accept we have made things go at a much, much faster rate than nature. It is very plain to ibserve, and the science proves it. As they say, science doesn't care about your beliefs. The facts are easy to connect like dots, and show that we are doing this.
Electric cars won't solve it, it's so much bigger. Stop cutting forests that absorb CO2, start installing solar & wind power generation out west in the endless dust bowl where sun & wind are plentiful. Come together as a human race and make s game plan and go at it like a team. The Paris Accord was a start, and even Kim Jong Un joined! But we pulled out under 45, it's like the anti-everything party. Do the opposite just to try to stand out. Join the team, get in board. What is wrong with over-compensating toward saving the earth if we can do it in safe, effective ways that let us continue our mostly normal living situations?
I don't have to "just accept" anything. I've learned over the years to look, examine and think first, because we get lied to and manipulated all the time. Sometimes intentionally, and sometimes it's just wrong or at best, incomplete.
Having lived through over half of the 'last 100 years' being referred to in this thread, I can tell you what it's like to actually live in a world with less than half the population we have now. I can also tell you what it's like to not have the power of technology, or the improvements in medical science of today.
The biggest change I see of the last century, was the invention of penicillin, and vaccines (genuine vaccines, not bio-weapon lab experiments) that cured polio, tuberculosis, small pox, measles, and to a large extent lessened the impact of influenza. Those diseases were responsible for killing hundreds of millions of people in genuine, actual pandemics, not plandemics. If you ever take the time to go through some of the old historic graveyards, you'll notice the shocking number of gravestones of children; so very many died before reaching adulthood. One of the reasons why families had so many children back then, was because there was a very good chance half of them would die before reaching the age of 20. Many women died in childbirth. Up until the 1950's, life was pretty tough.
It was that stiff mortality rate, that had kept the world population from growing overly large. From the beginning of the human race, up until 1962, the world population had reached only 3 billion. It was in the 1950's that we began to develop effective medical technology, and after WW2, the industrialization of America began to dramatically change everyday life, including food production and how to preserve food. Instead of just having something to eat period, the idea of nutrition and the quality of what you ate became a thing. Health became a practical concern, because we could actually do something about it. The effects of smoking which EVERYBODY did in those days, became apparent, and it didn't take long before people stopped smoking, which was responsible for a LOT of deaths due to cancer.
The cumulative effect of all this is instead of people being old at age 30, and really old once you reached 45, probably dead by 55, now people were living much longer, in better health than ever before. That's directly the result of food production and quality, and medical technology. It was extremely unusual for someone to reach 90 in those days, and if you made it to 100, that would actually make the news. Now it's no big deal. You aren't middle aged until you reach your mid 40's, and you aren't a senior until you reach your 60's, and now being in your 70's and 80's is like people used to be in their 40's and 50's.
The consequence? The world population went from 3 billion in 1962, to 7 billion in 2012. We more than doubled the population growth of all time in only 50 years. Therein lies the base cause of the issues we're facing today. The very things that have saved our lives, and improved the health and quality, have created the issues we're facing now. It doesn't appear there was any serious thought put into the consequences, and why would there be? Saving lives and quality of life are good! Why would that be a concern? This illustrates the necessity of thinking things through to see what the side-effects of the things we do might be, and figuring out how to deal with them before they could possibly create a separate crisis on their own.
you should probably take a break.
