You think this proves your point?
The greenhouse affect is real. That we are in long (centuries old) warming trend is real. The fact that we have come out of what's call the little ice age (about 500 years ago) is real. The situation is we don't know exactly what causes global temperature change [other than the Sun does not emit a constant amount of energy and has such things as 11 year cycles in solar storm activity as well as other cycles] but we do know that ice ages are a somewhat regular occurrance and that are we due (in terms of geological time) for another ice age. We also know that ice ages can occur quickly [very quickly in terms in geologic time] according to ice core records- but again don't know why this occurs- though of course, there would a runaway affect from snow reflecting more sunlight. It could be said that an Ice Age is the usual or most common condition [they can last longer than the warmer periods].
Global temperature has in the past been warmer than the present, though over big time scales (millions of years) the Sun should heat the Earth more [on the billions of year life cycle, the Sun will warm up until it goes nova- engulfing the inner planets and roasting Earth & killing all life on it].
Part of the reason Ice Age are said to occur abruptly, is because it's common for a steep rise in temperature just prior to the onset of a ice age [there are theories of why this happens, but again we don't have much information comfirming these theories].
Now, if you believe in the "hockey stick" of the "famous" surface global temperature chart, then it could be somewhat reasonable to suspect that this is the spike which will lead to an ice age. The problem is that this hockey stick is a false chart. It's distorted by the heat island effect. The heat island is a known regional warming affect caused by urban centers. This should have been well known by the maker of this chart- they didn't allow for it. Either this is due to just utter stupidity or they chose that the facts are not as important as the potential political and monetary gain.
Now, what isn't as easy to distort is global sea level rise. Where is it?
Now, one thing that should be known is that coral islands generally are sinking- coral island are in fact the result of the lowering of a land mass which is at a slow enough rate that coral life can build faster than the land is sinking- that's the frigging definition of a coral island!!!
"Charles Darwin published an explanation for the creation of coral atolls in the South Pacific (Darwin, 1842) based upon observations made during a five-year voyage aboard the HMS Beagle (1831-1836). His explanation, which is accepted as basically correct, involved considering that several tropical island types — from high volcanic island, through barrier reef island, to atoll — represented a sequence of gradual subsidence of an original oceanic volcano."
http://www.wordiq.com/cgi-bin/knowledge/lookup.cgi?title=Atoll

Any idiot knows this, but this doesn't stop the con men from dragging out as proof of sea level rise. Of course, all the clueless living on a beach may think sea level are rising because of erosion, but the facts are that sea levels are NOT rising significantly. Now, are we in a warming trend, but the "hockey stick" is fraud.