Here's my drunk take:
2-207(3) would only tell you there is a contract. The question is what are its terms, specifically, is there a warranty?
Applying the common law mirror image rule, the "acknowledgement" operates as a counter-offer. It is thereafter accepted by the parties' conduct. There is no warranty under the common law.
Under 2-207: Because a warranty is a material term, the first question is whether the "acknowledgement" is an acceptance at all. If it's not, it's a counter-offer. Following this, because the parties formed a contract under (3), there would be no warranty.
If it is an acceptance (it probably is), you move on to subsection (2). It's not clear that the parties are merchants. If they are not, there is a warranty. Caveat: this is assuming there is no difference between different and additional terms for purposes of 2-207(2).
If they are merchants: Because a warranty is probably a material term, the absence of warranty materially alters the contract. Assuming the absence of a warranty is an "additional" (as opposed to different) term, it would not become part of the contract. Therefore, there would be a warranty.