True, rarelamb, there is not a consensus (def: unanimity) among people in general because they either don't understand (haven't the scientific background), can't grasp the enormity of the possible consequences, or have a short-sighted vested interest in maintaining the bottom line. There is consensus, however, among independent scientists—scientists who generally work for educational or strictly research organizations rather than corporations or political organizations. David Suzuki presented a whole series of television programs outline and detailing the evidence for the environmental damage, most of it avoidable, that is man-caused. His evidence is pretty overwhelming—not to mention downright ominous.

And regarding your comments about other options, I agree. But I would say in addition to, not instead of. This means that we've go to stop hewing down forests and paving over green spaces (they take up CO2 and expel oxygen) and quit dumping toxic waste into the oceans, which is the major cause of plankton dying off. Years ago, oceanographer and explorer Jacques Cousteau said that the toxic waste we are dumping into the oceans is killing off the plankton, from which comes about 70% of the earth's oxygen and which also forms the base for the oceans' food chain.

(Do I hear someone gasping for breath?)

By the way, the sunspot cycle is consistent, and it peaks every eleven years. In a sense, the sun is a variable star. However, this very regular sunspot cycle, although it can interfere with radio reception, has no correlation with variations in the earth's weather. That's a fact about which there is no dispute among reputable scientists.

Don Firth