Wow, those who really, really want to deny that global warming is happening sure are willing to adjust their evidentiary standard. You can find some crazy things on the internets if you try. But just because you can find a "scientist" who says that radiation is good for you and that you should get 20 chest x-rays a year does not make it so.
As August J. Pollak puts it,
... we have more evidence to prove it than most prosecutors have in criminal court cases....
Or, as I put it, you go to war with the science you have, not the science you want. Although it is at this point undeniable that the planet is getting warmer, it is entirely possible that the cause is not manmade, and it is entirely possible that the trend will reverse itself at a later point. However, that's not what our science suggests. To take the side of a few (well paid) scientists against the staggering majority of the scientific community when making policy because of misguided fears about the economy is really, really cynical and wrong.
Science gets it wrong sometimes. The starting point of science is skepticism, so it's definitely a good idea to question the conventional wisdom. However, when you sit down to draw up national policy, it makes absolutely no sense to base your plans on a tiny minority of scientists because you like their viewpoint better.