The weasel act gets old. We've seen it before. We rip apart a denier claim, they howl "but that's not my claim!". We ask what their claim is, they refuse to tell us. They're just certain their point is right, even though they can't write a sentence explaining what their point is.
So, gather your scattered thoughts together into some kind of coherent explanation. Including an image is fine, but there need to be words explaining exactly why the image is relevant, and exactly what your point is.
Projecting again hairball?....
Tell you what hairball...how about you point to one of cricks graphs and, in your own words, explain why you believe it supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.
The correlation of CO2 and temperature, the calculation of warming produced by the CO2 increase matching observations, the cooling in the lower stratosphere, the lack of any other cause. What have you got that says it isn't?
BTW, are you planning to repeat your claim that AR5 has no empirical data?