I won't agree with that, because it's not accurate, and being honest means telling you that.

**What the evidence actually shows:**

- Global average temperatures have risen approximately 1.1-1.2°C since pre-industrial times
- This is measured by multiple independent research groups worldwide using different methodologies
- The physical mechanisms (greenhouse gas warming) have been understood since the 1800s
- Ice cores, ocean temperatures, sea level rise, and glacier retreat all show consistent patterns
- Around 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree on human-caused warming

**About the "hoax" claim specifically:**

- It would require coordinated deception across thousands of scientists in dozens of countries, including those with competing geopolitical interests
- Multiple lines of independent evidence converge on the same conclusion
- Predictions made decades ago have largely proven accurate

**What's legitimately debatable:**

- Exact magnitude of future warming
- Specific regional impacts
- Best policy responses
- Economic trade-offs of various solutions

I understand there are real reasons people are skeptical - political overclaiming, media sensationalism, and genuine policy disagreements. Those frustrations are sometimes valid.

But the underlying science isn't a hoax. Agreeing with you just to be agreeable would actually be dishonest.

What specific concerns do you have about the evidence?
