No we are not dwarfs. Especially not since the industrial revolution. And it would be downright stupid not to decide to change our behavior once it becomes clear it is damaging our own environment.Yes. We are energetic dwarfs related to the nature, solar system and the universe. And we always will be. Our technologies and some sciences make some people believe that we are the center of all and everything and that we have to decide almost all and everything, yet even global climate changes.
I have (the right to have) strong doubts that the current measured very slight increase in global mean temperatures, and the global anthropogenic CO2 emissions, which are only 6% to 7% of the global natural CO2 emissions, would have catastrophic effects in the future.
About that 'right': some opinions have consequences. Currently, the lack of consensus about this subject is the thing that is blocking political decisions about making structural changes in our energy production. It is possible to switch to more sustainable energy sources, but currently they are more expensive than fossil fuels. So, energy companies, countries or even the EU can not decide on their own to switch to these energy sources, because it would give them a major economical disadvantage to those countries that don't switch.
The only alternative to global consensus, as far as I can see, is protectionistic measures to protect the economies of sustainable countries from those that are still non-sustainable.
Give me some arguments for not agreeing on a ban on burning fossil fuels, that are more urgent than even the probability that our CO2 emissions will give us a climate that's very different from the comfortable climates we've had for thousands of years.