Not so much, actually:
Oh, and you know that the weather in London for the Olympics is miserable, right? Cold, overcast, thoroughly unpleasant. Me, I blame Global Warming.
I guess that this is the point where I once again have to complain that the data being used are lousy, and that 102° today is not the same as 102° in 1941. The reason is that 80% of the temperatures you hear reported are taken at the airport. For example, here is Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport:
By reasonable measures, the busiest airport in the world. The weather station here is heavily referenced in the news reports for the recent record high temperatures. But the airport didn't always look like this, for example back in the 1930s it looked positively pastoral:
You remember the 1930s, right? The Dust Bowl days? It was hot back then. So why isn't 102° today the same as 102° back then?
Because you didn't have thirty times as much concrete and asphalt soaking up the burning summer sun. Instead, you had fields of grass. You can do an experiment: go out and stand in your driveway. Then stand on your lawn. Which feels hotter?
It's worse, actually - the 1930s didn't have a thousand jet airplanes belching hot jet exhaust. You can do an experiment here, too: go stand next to your air conditioning compressor. Then go stand on the other side of your yard, away from it. Which feels hotter?
We're not measuring the same environment, even though the thermometer is in the same place. So how are the modern readings corrected for this "urban heat island" effect? Nobody says.
The data is a mess, and are completely unreliable for detecting a tenth of a degree change per decade. So everyone chill out about the "Global" "record" heat, OK?