Earth, with oceans holding huge amounts of CO2, is like a huge carbonated drink. If you open a warm carbonated drink, it fizzes like crazy. If you open a cold carbonated drink, it doesn't fizz much. CO2 in the atmosphere naturally goes up and down with ocean temperature. Climate Scientists looked at this and decided that the CO2 was driving temperature. They built their theory and models around this idea. Their famous, or infamious CO2 Climate Sensitivities most likely come from this. Their models did not yield the correct temperatures using real physics. They then added the little understood carbon feedback terms to their models and tweaked the coefficients until the models matched temperatures. When they got a match, they said the match proves the models are correct. That is not proof. What they have are Curve Fits and not Models. I worked at NASA for 44 years and do know the difference between a model and a curve fit and I recognize when data is in a stable cycle. You can see that CO2 has been rising during the most recent 10k years, while temperature was hanging around the modern normal. A well know Consensus Climate Scientist told me that correlation is not causation. He aimed it at my theory, but it applies to his Consensus Theory as well. They use correlation as conformation of causation all the time.