Plant, there are a couple of other possibilities:
1) That the primary cause of Global Warming was and always has been and will continue to be the entirely natural and slow withdrawal from the last Glacial phase. The fossil record has evidence of at least 262 Glacials and Inter-Glacials. We are still within the bounds of most of these, and the present Inter-Glacial most resembles that of the fourth most recent, which started around 450,000bp and lasted until 420,000bp:
In fact, neither the temperatures nor the duration of the present warming exceed those of the past, nor the rate of temperature change.
2) That even if mankind is injecting GHG's into the atmosphere at an unprecendented rate, natural feedback processes will mitigate, moderate, and reverse such the resultant temperature changes. Hard to tell, because AGW mitigation is not popular with those who model climate, and they are not modelling such. They could if they wanted to, but the "Chicken Little" approach and the resultant "Doom, Doom, Doom!" are clearly necessary to get published today. One must never suggest that an emergency does not exist.
There are multiple threads on both such topics. I would juust like to point out that AGW is a
theory, and that nobody alive today could possibly live long enough to answer the question for sure, because the next Climatic Optimum is somewhere between 1200 and 12,000 years in the future.
One last comment: Arguing that we must cease to burn FF's as long as cheap and plentiful FF's exist, is a non-starter of an idea. That is a precise parallel to arguing with a cancer patient that they should shoot themselves in the head before their disease first makes them miserable and then kills them. Because until we convert our existing energy-rich civilization to something more efficient, about three quarters of the existing humans depend entirely upon foodstuffs grown and harvested and processed and transported with cheap FF's.
"Kicking the Can", letting those people live, while we slowly convert to a more efficient infrastructure that preserves the largest number of humans, is both viable and the most likely path that we will take. I'm not at all looking forward to a world with 10 billlion humans, but I think we will see such and not to far from today.
Because we can survive AGW, as uncomfortable as that will be. But presently, and until many changes can be brought about to reduce dependance upon FF's, we cannot survive ceasing to burn FF's.