But Such a Humble Creature Such as Ourselves Could not Possibly affect the Earth, Right?

 From WUWT, 8-17 (emphasis added):

Those opinion leaders that Patrick meets with will realise, as Patrick has done himself, that virtually all climate change is natural and that mankind’s contribution is minimal; they will then be able to convey this to the public.

For how could man affect climate? Climate is energy. Greenhouse gases absorb and re radiate energy (heat) that would otherwise waft up into the upper atmosphere and space, thereby slowing increasing the energy balance of the earth.

Except for one thing: Man can't really affect the climate. Nor put people on the moon. Send Rovers to Mars. Spacecraft to Saturn, Jupiter, and beyond. Split Atoms, create bombs capable of in tandem destroying the earth many times over, explore the depths of the oceans miles below the surface, freeze matter to a near motionless state of near (or past?) 0 degrees kelvin, or probe the insides of atoms. (Other cool stuff, and pictures, here.)

We can't do that.

You see, our affect is "minimal." Sure, greenhouses make life on earth as we know it possible, and keep the earth around 55-60 degrees on average, instead of zero. Teeming with life, rather than a near lifeless frozen ball of rock hurtling through space. Raise those long term greenhouse gas up to levels probably not seen on earth in millions of years? Some seven billion plus people, collectively affecting the very atmosphere that traps and re radiates thermal radiation, ultimately driving climate on earth?

No big deal, for "virtually all climate change is natural, and mankind's contribution is minimal." Based upon very little.

That scientists strongly say otherwise?

A matter to likewise simply be dismissed: Science re directed by non scientists' superior knowledge, and scientists, attacked, and turned into "science scandals of the century."