We can't do anything about circumstances and events that are out of our control. If we got hit by a meteor large enough to cause global climate change, climate change would be the least of our problems. As for volcanoes, change your adjective "large" (Kuwai, Tambora, Krakatoa, Katmai and Pinatubo were "large") to "supermassive" and then you can talk about effects lasting more than a couple of years. Solar flares cause problems; there would have to be a significant change in the total luminosity of the Sun to have a major climate impact. (On that note, you might look up the science fiction story "Inconstant Moon" by Larry Niven.)
This global warming bloviation is all about trying to restrict OUR private property rights. Do you believe the U.S. should sign the Kyoto treaty, restrict property rights, or regulate the type of vehicle (IE SUV's) we can drive, etc, in the name of "saving the planet"?
No.
I believe we should respond appropriately.
Appropriately means first recognizing that there is a situation requiring a response. I believe that the scientific understanding of the climate changes occurring now is at that stage. The second step is formulating appropriate response strategies. In my opinion, that is what we -- the United States, other countries -- should be doing now. As more data is gathered, as the science continues to improve, selection of the final set of response strategies to implement will be facilitated. Implementation is the third step. Evaluation of the implementation effectiveness is the fourth step; modifications to the iniitial implementation would be the fifth step. And so on.
"A majority believe that the longer trend will be downward."
- U of Wisconsin climatologist Reid Bryson, in his 1976 preface to Lowell Ponte's book :'The Cooling'