That video is about carbon, not temperature data. The only temperature data presented was the stratosphere, and the data doesn't go back far enough to be useful; even still, no linear effect shown.
If you want to prove to me that CO2 induced cooling in the stratosphere, you're going to need data that shows that the cooling continued as CO2 emissions increased. The chart doesn't show that, it shows that it cooled decades ago and has been stable.
The stratospheric 'cooling' is used as a linchpin argument against solar influence, and to say that the data is flimsy is an understatement.
40 years of increases is quite a lot. And it directly falsifies the solar flux hypothesis.
We have to go with the best model we have. Just saying "the data isn't good enough" to infinity and having no alternative explanation is pretty damn weak.
There are plenty of possible alternative explanations for the stratosphere cooling. First, we'd need data about which wavelengths of light heat the stratosphere and measurements about the solar output in those wavelengths. We'd also need to know how much warming is done by heat reflected by the Earth itself, such as glaciers, cloud cover, whatever.
Since CO2 is the highest today, we should see the most dramatic effects occurring in that graft now, rather than before.
Of course, this is all if you actually believe the climate data, which I don't. Governments and climate scientists have been caught routinely modifying the raw data to fit their models.
It goes through the basic evidence quite clearly. There's more of course, but this will do.