"A cynic might note that no set of observations is inconsistent with climate change" A set of observations consistent with prior historical observations, and l

"A cynic might note that no set of observations is inconsistent with climate change" A set of observations consistent with prior historical observations, and lacking a long term trend up or down, would be inconsistent with climate change. Edit: the following actually agrees with part of your comment. Reading is fundamental. "Climate change" is in fact more accurate, because climate also includes things like rainfall. Even if a region doesn't become notably warmer, it may get more rain, or less, which can cause problems if it leads to flooding, or drought. Also, given the significance of ocean currents in moderating temperatures, if atmospheric warming leads to ocean current changes, then you could get regional cooling. (For example, the theory that cold fresh water from melting ice in the Arctic could disrupt the currents in the Atlantic, which carry warm water north to the UK, which helps the UK be warmer than you'd expect at its latitude. Thus warming -> Canadian ice melting -> cooler UK and northern Europe. Not sure what the current thinking is on this being likely.)