Don, you're cherry-picking your data.
I think there is still a controversy over how much economic development contributes to global warming.
While there is much yet to learn, the so-called controversy is largely clouding of the waters by those with an economic interest. Within the last month there's been renewed information of the rate of melting of the Greenland ice-sheet, in addition to melting in other zones, such as Mt. Kilimanjaro. Thousands of ice cores taken over the last century show that the ice goes back tens of thousands of years. If it had been as warm during the Roman era as your sources indicate, that ice would have melted then or would never have formed. Arctic permafrost that has been stable since the last ice age (as shown by the number of mammoths preserved in it) is rapidly turning to mush. Of course you can find a few scientists who disagree with this assessment, just like you can find a few scientists who don't like evolution. You can find a few scientists who believe in ghosts, in Sasquatch, in fairies, in alien abduction, and in all sorts of things. It is extremely rare in science that someone who goes against the grain is shown to be correct (Galileo, Kepler, etc). Most of them are just cranks.