Phrasing such as "influences..." ..."feed the pattern but not the pattern..." are not scientific. I assume the "pattern itself" is what, a world temperature? What is that?
Of course they're not scientific, this is not a symposium and using jargon is not important. What matters is expressing one's point, and I'll restate mine in case it wasn't clear:
Global warming is the long-term trend of increase in average global temperatures;
Global cooling is the long-term trend of decrease in average global temperatures.
How about this(wikipedia). Climate = "The classical period is 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). These quantities are most often surface variables such as temperature, precipitation, and wind. "
Global warming = an increase in average global temperatures for one or more successive 30 year periods, global cooling = a decrease.
Since the Earth is in an open system, there's no thermodynamic equilibrium.
But in the absence of thermo equilibrium, how can you ascribe or impute a flatline secular temperature on which to make a claim that "warming" or "cooling"? Seems to me you would have to use long term climate averaging, then ascribe a shorter term averaging and look at the difference in variances between periods of time. This implies if not accurate, at least reasonable believable calculations of "world temperature." Both current, recent historical, and that of past millennia or longer.
A world temperature? What is that?