Here's a scientific paper that debunks your assertions. Looking at surface air temperature only (as per your graph) misses about 90% of the climate data for warming, even if that graph is accurate (which I doubt).
http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~douglass/papers/PLA_21192_proofs_plusFigs1_2.pdf
Read that, please. A snippet:
There has been considerable interest in whether Earth has beenwarming or cooling in recent years. Many studies show that theglobally averaged surface temperature has been “flat” or decreasingsince 1998. For example, in a recent study Kaufmann et al. [1] state“. . . global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and2008”. Using surface temperature as the best indicator of warminghas been questioned by Pielke [2,3], who says “Unlike temperatureat some specific depth in the ocean or height in the atmosphere,where there is a time lag in its response to radiative forcing,no time lags are associated with heat changes, since the actualamount of heat present at any time is accounted for. Moreover,because the surface temperature is a massless two-dimensionalglobal field while heat content involves mass, the use of surfacetemperature as a monitor of climate change is not accurate forevaluating heat storage changes” [3]. In our treatment, this takesthe following form: ocean heat content (OHC) has a direct relationshipto Earth’s radiation budget, whereas surface temperature doesnot. In paper [4] we quantified this relationship and tentativelyidentified three recent abrupt changes in the implied radiation imbalance.We argued that each of these changes was correlated witha climate shift (CS) that had been identified independently
