For a long time, the argument
seemed to be that global warming either wasn't real or [has been] that it wasn't being caused by man.
Has the world seen enough evidence now to move beyond that?
The argument you outline has been dictated by a small group of skeptics, many of whom are paid by those who make money from polluting and who don't wish to see changes to the way they do business. They've gone through at least three stages of denial: first that climate change doesn't exist; then that it does exist but it's not human caused; then that we are causing it, but it's too expensive to fix.
'Warming' exists, and it's a normal part of earths cycle, and it is extremely doubtful that we could 'fix it', even if we knew how.
The author is an idiot.
...The author is an idiot.
No, He is a zoologist who figured out how to get free publicity. As an added benefit there is no downside for him in taking the sky is falling line. Remember all those guys like Paul Ehrlich (The Population Bomb), the Club of Rome, Limits to growth, etc? They are still considered experts and are still in the press and on TV pontificating on the future. History and accountability only exist for conservatives.