No, you have the Law of Gravitation, which states that two masses attract each other. There is a tremendous amount of data proving it over a long period of time with no unexplainable exceptions.
Thus, it is a Law. There are precious few Laws in Science.
The fact we don't understand the exact mechanism, quantum, space warping, or "It just sucks" does not matter. The effect is what matters.
Less provable ideas become Theories. They have good evidence that is not fully proven under a wide range of circumstances. There are competing ideas and they have some experimental backing as well. Theory of Relativity has this status because we have observed light bending and time dilation in controlled experiments.
Global Warming falls under a hypothesis, it has some data, not enough to qualify as a Theory.
It also has some disturbing issues with data, and people like Green Peace overstating the issue to emotionalize it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC7bE9jopXE
It also has a control, Mars, that shows polar melting and surface warming in the ABSENCE of human industrial activity.
So the change may very well be outside the biosphere, in a Sun cycle or other phenomenon we don't understand.
In other words, we might be able to prove global warning, but the exact mechanism is under depute.
So if we go mucking about by reducing human em missions we might have no effect.
Or we might get more desperate and try crude terraforming, (increase planetary albedo for example) only to discover the external effect swings BACK, plunging us into an ice age.
The whole Green movement is a strange form of Conservative thinking. You are trying to force stability onto a dynamic system... good luck with that.