Interglacial temperatures don't follow a standard deviation normal curve type graph.
Correct.
They spike up very quickly after the ice age ends, drop back down, and generally fluctuate a significant amount without any human input at all.
Not according to any the historical temperature graphs that I've seen. The temperature rises rapidly at the end of the ice age and then levels off an eventually begins to fall again.
At the beginning of the current interglacial, the global temperature spiked up by at least 4 degrees in just a few hundred years.
Seems plausible. It's often noted that the difference between a mile of ice in Northern United states and today is about 4 degrees.
That's a massively faster increase than the current warming trend that everybody seems to be so worried about.
Only if by "massively faster" you actually mean "about the same". The worst case scenario is about 3.5 degrees by the year 2100. The expected rise is between 2 and 6 degrees by 2400. So human warming is maybe a little more, maybe a little less than the end of the last glacial period.
It's also cooler now than it was during that spike, but the alarmists never seem to publicize that fact.
There was a paper published by Easterbrook, I think, that made that claim, but he goofed on the "present" date. He thought the last temperature in his data series went up to 2010, when it was actually 1855 (the last entry was 95 years before the "geological" present which is 1950). So while the end of the last glacial period was warmer than 1855, when you adjust for his misunderstanding of current temperatures (ie, you don't use 1855 as your benchmark for 21st century temperatures), you find that the end of the glacial period is actually somewhat lower than present day temperatures.