That isn't an argument at all.
It's made-up nonsense by people who think their uninformed and unfounded assumptions should be given equal consideration to the actual scientific analysis and data.
Not "the scientific community". Some particular scientists. With the caveats of "with current technology and costs". Which didn't turn out to hold true, as new technologies provided new options.
And that technological bump just changes where the tipping point is. Fossil fuels are a limited resource. They take millions of years to produce, and decades to exploit and destroy. That's not sustainable, obviously.
Yeah, this is just completely wrong, and demonstrates that you likely haven't
ever looked at any scientific reports on climate change. Here's the most comprehensive in recent history, so you can catch up with the absolute basics;
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/
Literally every claim you made there is false.
And those people are knee-jerking based on a lack of comprehension, and a choice to remain willfully ignorant.
That's not something to be applauding.