[cogitator]

Notice the readings thousands of years apart, how can those be compared to the current 150 year blip today? Obviously a blip like today's would be lost since each measurement represents centuries of average CO2 levels compressed into one measurement.

It's fine to make that observation, but it's specious unless you can propose a natural mechanism that would drive up CO2 concentrations 80-100 ppm in 100 years. As Sigman and Boyle 2000 show (and there are other studies citable that are still trying to figure out how a full glacial-interglacial transition can cause the 80-100 ppm CO2 change), it's not that easy. You might get a short-term perturbation with something akin to a Younger Dryas entry or exit, but what else?

[palmer]

It's fine to make that observation, but it's specious unless you can propose a natural mechanism that would drive up CO2 concentrations 80-100 ppm in 100 years.

It's much more specious to claim the current peak is the highest in 650,000 years. There is no science to back that up and plenty of hypotheses of how large CO2 increases can happen, but there is no hypothesis or scientific validity to claim that centuries of CO2 mushed into one reading is proof that there are no peaks.