The "natural cycle" argument is one of the most common points around climate change denial. It's also one of the most commonly debunked. See the following:
It's also unclear to me how scientists might not have enough data to validate climate change in the last several hundred years, but they do have enough data to validate the natural cycle hypothesis spanning thousands of years.
I'm not going to engage more deeply here because this post has the smell of trolling to it, but if you're engaging in good faith, there are hundreds of reputable reports refuting the natural cycle hypothesis:
UN - https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/debunking-eight-...
MIT - https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/todays-climate-change-simila...
Columbia University - https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2017/04/04/how-we-know-cli...
It's also unclear to me how scientists might not have enough data to validate climate change in the last several hundred years, but they do have enough data to validate the natural cycle hypothesis spanning thousands of years.
I'm not going to engage more deeply here because this post has the smell of trolling to it, but if you're engaging in good faith, there are hundreds of reputable reports refuting the natural cycle hypothesis:
https://www.google.com/search?q=natural+cycle+arguments+on+c...