Go for you for checking things out.
But when looking at an argument such as the link you posted ask yourself questions such as these:
1. There is a graph here without attribution? Why? Where did it come from? Who created it? When? Based on what data? Does it correspond with reality as published in articles at reputable colleges and universities?
2. When seeing the link to an institution you don't recognize check out its credentials. No need to ask about Stanford or Oxford but the reference is, literally, to two guys in a garage.
And if someone links to crackpots rather than a college or university or reputable lab (CERN, Argonne, Lawrence Livermore) then you need to ask why.
3. If the oceans are heating up you only have a small number of possibilities.
3A. From the bottom up ... not happening.
3B. At arbitrary points at varying depths ... not possible.
3C. Uniformly ... not happening.
3D. From the top down ... which is happening.
So the next question is what can heat the upper most layers of hte ocean and there are only two possibilities:
3D1. A warmer atmosphere.
3D2. Increasing absorption of solar energy.
Measurements of the sun's energy output establish clearly, and unequivocally, that it is not capable of creating the affects observed.
Why are so many people putting so much energy into denying the obvious? We are fouling our nest. And unlike birds we can not fly away.
