(The author is a Reuters Market analysts. The views expressed are his own.)
A clutch of recent studies reinforces evidence that people are causing climate change and suggests debate should now move on to a more precise understanding of its impact on humans.
The reports, published in various journals in recent weeks, add new detail to the theory of climate change and by implication cast contrarians in a more desperate light.
Advertisement: Story continues below
To be clear: there's nothing wrong with doubting climate change; but doubts based on ignorance, a political bias or fossil fuel lobbying don't help.
The basics, well known, are that rising greenhouse gas emissions are almost certainly responsible for raising global average surface temperatures (by about 0.17 degrees Celsius a decade from 1980-2010), in turn leading to sea level rise (of about 2.3 millimetres a year from 2005-2010) and probably causing more frequent bouts of extreme heatwaves and possibly more erratic rainfall.
Vast uncertainties remain about the risk of runaway warming, and the urgency: for example, about what level of greenhouse gas emissions will cause how much sea level rise this century.
The latest studies suggest firmer evidence for a human finger print, for example showing that pollution is largely responsible for a slow cycle in sea surface temperatures in the last century.
Recent studies also cast more light on trends, for example showing that the world has seen hotter years since 1998 (previously held by some as a record); and presenting firmer forecasts for 2050.
And others show lessons from the end of the last Ice Age: for example that rises in carbon dioxide preceded (and, by implication, caused) warming; and that sea levels at one point were rising by several metres a century.
None of these are individually particular clinchers - the problem was already clear - but collectively they pin down uncertainty seized on by sceptics.
Climate science was under a cloud after a "climategate" scandal of scientists' emails leaked in 2009 was used by sceptics to suggest that they had deliberately manipulated data - allegations rejected by several public inquiries.
And a major UN panel report made a couple of factual errors, most notably saying that all Himalayan glaciers may melt by 2035, which seemed a typographical error meant to read 2350.
In retrospect, it's incredible that these cast doubt on the scientific theory.
Like any theory, climate change is based on probabilities and observations couched in error margins and difficult to prove conclusively.
It's complicated by the poor understanding of runaway effects which could make the planet all but unrecognisable - in warming, desertification and sea level rise - over the next few centuries, distracting from a cool view.
Observations alone of rising temperatures, seas and extreme heatwaves in the past century are enough to demonstrate the problem, coupled with the lack of a plausible, alternative explanation to rising man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
Previously, only Antarctic temperature data had been used, which appeared to show rising CO2 following temperature rather than the other way round.
Those older results had suggested a complex effect involving warming oceans, rising CO2 and melting ice which together tipped the world out of an Ice Age 20,000 years ago. Now the role of CO2 in driving the global climate change seems clearer.
Examining the Earth's more recent history, scientists from Britain's Met Office Hadley Centre showed this week how a new understanding of the impact of pollution on cloud formation explained a slow temperature cycle previously blamed on ocean currents.
They said models could now explain an Atlantic sea surface cooling in the 1970s, and subsequent warming as clean air laws took effect. Various phases of the cycle are linked with droughts in parts of Africa and the Amazon, as well as hurricane activity.