We don't have a clue what caused it, if it will continue, or anything.
Who cares what the cause is? We know the greenhouse effect exists and is capable of increasing the temperature. Whether the temperature is increasing because of that or for any other reason or any combination of causes, it's still a good idea to cut back on the things we can control.
Plus, it isn't even global warming, its local warming some places have higher highs and others don't. Just take a look in an Almanac and you will see that the highest temperatures for a given day don't correspond with the CO2 emissions for the year. Same thing with the lows.
Of course there's no correlation between the daily high temperatures for a year and the CO2 emissions for that year. The whole point is that the effect is cumulative - it's easy to pump CO2 in to the atmosphere and it is naturally removed at a slower rate. It's the CO2 level that is important and the daily highs aren't really a good measure of temperature either.
It's really easy to fail to find support for a hypothesis by looking in the wrong direction.
Ok, so some of the costland is gone and cities must be moved further inland. That is also assuming that technology will not advance to where that is no longer a problem which my guess is based on technology throughout history is that if there is a problem humans will solve it.
Seas rise, drought increases, for both reasons farmland disappears and the world's already excessive population begins to starve. Of course the rich nations will probably survive, but people will experience even worse problems in the countries where life is already hard.
Atmospheric quality is a global commons and damage to it is an externality of many industries. Unless we have world-wide coordination to set standards and maintain air quality it will always be the situation that nobody will pay for it.