heres the problem: they said "to the best of our limited knowledge." Not "to the best of our knowledge".
If you only have a century or so of data on something as ever present as weather, then you have a good understanding of Day to day patterns and understanding of weather.
However when you're talking about climate shifts, it's been shown those are massive and we know nothing about them except for the evidence left behind in geologic layers. Those are best case guesses from educated people.
Now, when they say we are this huge impact with such minuscule data and they imply huge changes in climate is, the majority, humanities fault I am skeptical. I am skeptical because they have no fucking clue what the weather patterns were in the 1600s, 1700s or even 1800s. Let alone 1000 years ago. And the earth is billions of years old. To assume similar changes/seasons/temp spikes etc have never happened before is ludicrous.
So they are judging a possibly normal climate shift they have no understanding of and correlating it to the wrong things.
Because Limited knowledge is right. A centuries worth of data is nothing on this subject.