NASA: Climate Change Evidence - http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/
Union of Concerned Scientists: http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/global-warming/science-and-im...
Weather Underground: Evidence of Climate Change: http://www.wunderground.com/climate/evidence.asp
I can come up with a million of these. When an axiomatic starting point is fixed (hello religion and other cultural beliefs), you can come up with post-hoc rationalisations that not only mean you get to be right, but you get to feel smart and special (and with this one, you get to make people who have no idea what they're talking about feel that their street-smarts or some bullshit "common sense" is superior to actually knowing things, like those scientists who think they're so much better than everyone else). Trying to reason anyone out of a position they did not reach through reason is a wasted effort. You'll just go insane if you try :)
If it's a heated debate about who can call who which names then everybody loses. Which is why I chose to present them with the evidence they asked for while giving them the benefit of the doubt. When somebody with views like this gives the invitation to discuss evidence I say take it in good faith and encourage them to continue down that path.