A hypothesis must be falsifiable for it to be valid in the first place, and saying "the Sun did it" is a valid way to falsify the hypothesis; thus you now must also prove the Sun is not affecting climate change to the degree that we have measured.
No one has been able to prove this, and all evidence collected by NASA seems to indicate that the Sun is by far the largest driver of climate fluctuations on Earth, even during the modern age, not humans.
And now you crack out another absolute "all evidence collected by NASA" which is also just plain wrong. First NASA isn't the only group studying climate change, nor is it their primary mission. So whether or not NASA has or has not found evidence that the Sun is the largest driver is immaterial.
And again a simple Google search shows you are utterly wrong in regards the Sun being the primary driver.
Just go away.
Those same scientists produced the data that made this possible. The same predictions they've been making since the 70s, the same ones Al Gore et al. built a financial empire on... did not come true, and are woefully wrong.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Kpr6U8FBQEM/UPRuAB8NUbI/AAAAAAAABy...
Pay attention to both scales. Did humans have greater climate change ability than we have now, in the past, but then suddenly stopped? Notice the range labeled "mini ice age" covers a time period during an extended period of abnormally low solar activity (with the Spörer and Maunder minimums happening during this period).
Edit: Also, sorry, I couldn't find better URLs for these images, Google isn't cooperating today.
On a more personal note, if a scientific consensus is not it, what kind of information would be able to convince you that man made global warming is real?