There's a big difference between proving laws of motion using empirical evidence and effectively speculating about what may or may not be more than a century in the future.
As is always the case at any given point in time there are a vast array of people making predictions about the future. Almost all of them will prove to be wrong.
For his part, for Arrhenius to be proven to be definitively correct, he would have had to consider all the indeterminate factors that influence planetary physics before coming to his conclusion. And 90% of those factors were only discovered in the late 20th century.
Planetary climate is an outworking of the multiplex interactions between indeterminate numbers of complex, chaotic, open, non-linear and multi-variate chemical and physical systems.
Hence, distilling the influence on a planet's climate down to just one single factor - viz., human activity - to the exclusion of all the other many variables (some which are certainly still unknown) - and then concluding definitive causality, is unscientific on any objective measure.
Since time immemorial, humanity has been afraid of stuff (heck, the entire premise of doctrinal religion is based on the fear of the afterlife). I'll see the current fad of climate change fear and I'll raise it with concern about we are learning about the changing nature of that big yellow ball in the sky...the very thing that powers Earth, but about which we know almost nothing:
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)