AGW Hysteria?

After having a discussion last night with MerryK and PurringPiggy about AGW (anthropogenic, or man-caused, global warming) by lantern (our power went out for about 8 hours), I was read this article this morning, that was originally from the The Times (of London), about "Scientists Drill Into Greenland Ice for Climate-Change Clues". The last paragraph referenced made me wonder about their thought process:

The Eemian began 130,000 years ago, ending 15,000 years later, and is the most recent time in the Earth's past when temperatures resembled those that can be expected if greenhouse gas emissions are not brought under control. [emphasis mine]

What I would like to know is this - if men could not have "caused" the end of the last ice age due to their excessive CO2 emissions, how can these scientists be so certain that man is the cause now? Our climate has fluctuated wildly in the past (tropical plant fossils have been found in the Arctic!) and the warming in the last century is more likely to be a normal climate cycle than one caused by man through greenhouse gases that must "be brought under control"!

Ironically, the warming stopped in 2000 and the earth has been cooling slightly ever since. I guess the fact that the SUN is in a protracted low sun spot cycle is just a coincidence to these people? What has the potential to affect our climate more? Man or the Sun? Obviously, it is the Sun.

Therefore, since the earth has been proven to be much warmer, and much colder, in the past than it is now, how arrogant do you have to be to claim that it is now man's fault that the climate is changing?