Not necessarily true. Depends on where we are falling of the grand scale. Or whether or not this change in the past fifty years is not just an aberration... a spike in the graph... if we had a graph that was more than say 100 years old.
ALL we are seeing is a change. We have neither the records or the know how to actually interpret that change.
And it doesn't even matter how "educated" the interpreters might be. By definition they don't have the experience (due to the vast time scales), to even attempt an interpretation.
Let's assume for a second that this is the graph for the temperature swings in the past 4 billion years...
https://i.imgur.com/2z7DGTG.pngLet's also assume that we are NOW, at the very end of this graph (the far right). A 50 year sample on a graph this large, means absolutely nothing. Actually it means less than nothing. The last 5000 years would be about .00000000000000000000000000000000000000001 pixels.
We have no real clue whether we are still in the trough or on the rising side of a crest. Even assuming that humans could in anyway affect this graph, short of say an all out nuclear war... is ludicrous.
/e I can just see the Earth typing: ROEL (rolling on the ecliptic laughing). Imma just slap some glacier action on these folk so they BEGIN to understand that they mean....diddly.
If we assume that graph is over 4 billion years then what we see would be a spike 50% of the height of the graph in less than a single pixel's worth of time. Doesn't take a genius to know that's not a natural occurrence since the slopes on that graph are mild by comparison.
Apparently you have no idea how to read graphs, since if it was full of spikes 5 degrees high it would look like random noise, not like smooth curves.