Yes, the Earth has gotten warmer. Warming is change. What it means is that the warmer temperatures are hanging around longer as the years go on. Bush fire seasons are more prolific around the world because heat waves are longer, glaciers and ice caps don't freeze back to their previous year's size because the winter is not as long etc. The posts aren't moving, there have just been new discoveries from competing scientists who are only agreeing and adding on to previous truths. Not uncommon for them to be government funded though when they're employed by universities. The US is run by Wall St, Australia is run by coal and mining. Both have something to lose by being critical of the hard tested facts in hand that unanimously agree with climate change and have the most dangerous agenda if anyone does. There might be the odd well written rebuttal, but yet are any credible peer reviewed scientific literature.
As for the newspaper links, just because it isn't getting hotter by an obviously perceived value every year doesn't mean it is not warming. 15 years is too small a time frame when we're talking a rise of 0.8% globally since 1900. I don't know why Britain's temperature could decrease in that window (and the article doesn't say) but melting ice can decrease local ocean temperatures with are what create weather fronts. Lines like "Critics say this shows carbon dioxide isn't as damaging as was claimed" is absolutely rubbish because that is complete disregard of what radiative forcing is. Some of these sites are taking little bits of info to suit their cause, like a single stretch of ice was greater than the previous year (then goes to mention that the previous year was a record low), while on the larger scale some Antarctic and Greenland glaciers are on runaway melts. Then there is more crap like "But the leaked documents are said to show that the governments who fund the IPCC are demanding 1,500 changes to the Fifth Assessment Report." So who leaked the documents? Speaking of agendas I'll take a stab in the dark and saw it is the governments, who are funding the report because it is the same governments run by Wall St, Koch Brothers etc are set to lose their wealth and they want the facts to suit them. They'll pass it on and say 'scientists disagree' while it is more likely their fat economist with a doctorate in money.
If you want math, diagrams and some hard references then here is an easy one
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/exec-office-other/climate-change-full.pdfedit: that was easy regarding Britain. Positive and negative oscillation
https://www.wmo.int/pages/themes/climate/significant_natural_climate_fluctuations.php further reading explains that it isn't always uniform and regions can encounter more positive or negative over a period of time. Probably where the deniers cherry picked periods of cooling over the caps despite overall ice coverage in recession causing an increase in sea level by 7.5inches since 1900.
