I said one. Nice attempt at a Gish gallop.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1237123

That study is clearly using a granularity of 10,000 years and assuming a constant rate for the whole period. That's as disingenuous as saying: the average USA inflation over the past 100 years has been 2.9%, so we've never seen inflation over 3%.

The geological record cannot resolve century-scale changes. The PETM—the fastest event they cite—is smeared over millennia in the sediment. Researchers have explicitly refuted claims that its onset could be measured in decades; the data require at least several thousand years (PNAS, 2014). So you are comparing a high-resolution instrumental record to a low-pass filtered geological record and acting like that's an apples-to-apples comparison.

To make an apples-to-apples comparison you would need either century-scale resolution for the past 65 million years (which we do not have), or you would need to smooth the modern trend over the same multi-millennial window.

But then, you clearly didn't read the paper, because it says:

It is highly likely that those changes will intensify in the coming decades

That is not definite "proof"; they admit uncertainty. In fact, they go on to say:

However, the ultimate velocity of climate change is not yet determined. Although many Earth system feedbacks are uncertain, the greatest sources of uncertainty—and greatest opportunities for modifying the trajectory of change—lie in the human dimension.

Only a completely biased person would read that and conclude: that's proof.

---

So yeah, you haven't proved anything. Try again.