Paul,
As a scientist, I'd keep a more open mind. There are undoubtedly a number of competing processes and long term and short term cycles. The latter man-made. I am in no position to bang my fist on the table asnd dismiss your objections as nonsense. In the same way, you should be open to the possibility that man is currently (in the past 100 years) adding a significant global warming load which will effect us in the short run of the next 100 years.
This does not discount the major shifts in temperatures caused by the abrupt relocation of the earth's magnetic poles and change in axis of rotation, volcanic effects, impact of tidal movements by the moons gravitational pull, natural releases of methane and so forth.
To limit one's point of view to one side or the other, is from my stand point, "faith-based" stances, in which ideas and policies are based on infectious ideas current in a particular group, rather than reason based on balancing deductions and predictions from facts with a healrthy awareness of pressures to follow fashion.
My own view, based on observations made on animals and birds and scientific measurements of ocean levels (height), pollutant concentrations and mean temperatures, that we are in a period of global warming which correlates with our industrial way of life to support massive population growth.
The forces denying global warming that do so because of faith-based defense of unmanaged economic and population growth and an aversion to birth control, are far more driven by self interest than environmentalists trying to protect the planet.
Asher