CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL

Fallacy
-------
It is known from physiological principles, ecological coexistence, and predation traces that cats prey on mice and other small rodents. such predation has also been observed in the wild and in the lab.
but because nobody knows exactly what fraction of cats have a mouse in their mouths at any given time, it's impossible to conclude that cats eat mice.

it is well known that metallic substances are good conductors of electricity. this has been exploited for centuries for various purposes.
but because nobody knows exactly how many electrons in a gram of copper are moving along a voltage gradient at any given time, we can't be certain that copper is a conductor.

it is known from first principles that Donald Trump is a fag. but because nobody besides him and the ~25 other men he blows on a regular basis knows exactly how many cocks he sucks per day, we just can't be sure that he's a flaming homosexual.

this is the argument you're making; you bring up something irrelevant to try and cast doubt on what is known for a certainty both from theory and from repeated consistent experimental evidence.

Sources
-------
Evans, D. M. W. "The Notch-Delay Solar Hypothesis." Evidence-Based Climate Science: Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as the Primary Source of Global Warming (2016): 337.

Richards, Gary P., and David MW Evans. "Development of a carbon accounting model (FullCAM Vers. 1.0) for the Australian continent." Australian Forestry 67.4 (2004): 277-283.

Other papers and patents from the Stanford Ph.D.

Evans, David MW. "Digit-reversal method and apparatus for computer transforms." U.S. Patent No. 4,823,297. 18 Apr. 1989.

Evans, David MW. "A second improved digit-reversal permutation algorithm for fast transforms." IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing 37.8 (1989): 1288-1291.

Common Arguments
----------------
-I personally think it's because of the sun.
It's obviously not. Firstly because the sun's not doing anything that should be producing trends on the ~100year scale, and secondly because of stratospheric cooling - If the Sun was warming the Earth, the top of the atmosphere would also warm up.

-when my cousin was a kid, it was 'global cooling' literally. They were worried about another ice age.
Maybe you read some shitty news articles about that, but global cooling was never the majority view among climatologists. We've understood the basics of greenhouse gas forcing for a long time now. Also, "scientists were wrong in the past, so we can't know anything" is a complete failure of an argument.

-when I was a kid it was 'global warming' and now they've had to change the name because of being busted, to 'climate change'
That never happened. The terms 'global warming' and 'climate change' have always been used more-or-less interchangeably.

-of course, the climate is ALWAYS changing.
What a dumb statement; People worried about AGW are worried about the scale, rate, and effects of the changes.

CO2 + Infrared
--------------
the atmosphere is partially transparent to infrared; most terrestrial radiation (infrared) is absorbed and then re-emitted somewhere in the atmosphere; since re-emission is in a random direction, half the absorbed radiation goes back to the surface and half goes out to space.
CO2 and other greenhouse gases increase the percentage that is absorbed and reemitted, meaning that less passes through and more gets trapped.

Dating Techniques
-----------------
There are several age dating techniques from relative age dating to absolute age dating. Relative age dating uses things like deposition and erosional rates and cross cutting relationships.

Absolute age dating uses techniques such as radiometric age dating, lake sediment dating, and tree ring dating which can then be used to calibrate your strata and your fossils which allows strata to be constrained to specific time periods.

It is most certainly not circular reasoning. But you wouldn't know anything about that because you've never even taken a moment to google 'how do geologists date strata'

And by the way, I was not talking about dating techniques. I was talking about how geologic time scales is at the very least hundreds of thousands of years old and has nothing whatsoever to do with a discussion on modern anthropogenic warming.