Nobody in their right mind would argue that there are not long term climate cycles, and nobody would argue that there are not people and groups who use fear for their particular ends.

But what is it about the idea of a current global warming trend that is being driven in significant part by human activity that you object to?

Do you deny that there is a greenhouse effect caused by atmospheric gases?

That carbon dioxide is one such gas?

That much of the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide in the past several decades is the result of burning fossil fuels and forests?

That current global average temperatures are increasing?

That there has been a sharp increase in the rate of temperature change in the last several decades?

That this rate of increase is much greater than at any measureable time in the past? (note: rate of increase, not total increase)

That increasing average global temperatures will have a significant effect on both local and global climate patterns?

That these effects will be harmful to many life forms (including humans) and ecosystems?

That these effects will be harmful to the world economy?

That there can be a "tipping point", at which gradual changes in climate could become rapid?

That if such a tipping point were passed, there could be significant melting of both the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps? (I don't think you would argue that sea levels would not increase significantly - in the range of many meters - were that antarctic cap to melt)

Just trying to get a handle on where your objections to the theories lie.

And PS - would you argue that there are not significant economic entities who have their own agendas and who would benefit from downplaying anthropogenic global warming?