Wayne Stollings wrote:
Not really, the important question is whether there is a signifcant anthropogenic contribution which could or should be mitigated to prevent a more significant negative impact.
Disagree, there is still a large argument about that still taking place in the scientific community.
There can be a huge disagreement in the scientific community and the decision either way is not important to anyone outside of that community.
There are still many uncertainties that still need to be resolved with attribution.
Not for the question at hand, which is whether we cqan mitigate our impcat on the climate in time or not.
There is no observational evidence for most of the warming being due to human activity. There is far more evidence of a paleoclimatological solar driver, and even more evidence that solar activity has had a dominant role over the 20th Century, and a significant to dominant role in the late-20th Century warming.
Only in the fringes of the scientific community and not in the areas in which the majority of the experts reside.