"it answers Sawzaw's overarching question"

No it does not.

The question is about the future when and if the suspected global warming from CO2 can be stopped.

How are we going to prevent the build up of heat in the atmosphere that is produced by even 100% clean and efficient energy sources of the future?

If you look at the chart where you are fixated on the last spike. look at the bottom of the dips.

You will see temperature rising while CO2 is falling. That conflicts with the unarguable consensus.

Then look at the peaks where CO2 is still rising after Temperatures start falling. Another conflict with the unarguable consensus.

***Earth's flora, fauna and lansdcape change a lot over the 100000 years between peaks so some variation is expected****

So variations in the peaks are expected but you keep saying the last one is different. Why is it that only the difference in the last one matter?.

Are we due for a peak or not? If so why is it not caused by the same things that caused the last 4?

When a minor piece of data conflicts, you claim it is minor, unimportant and does not matter.

When a minor thing agrees with your bandwagon mindset, you claim it is very important and proves you are right.