EPA Fascism versus America: There Is No “Consensus” Among Scientists (4 of 7)

This is the fourth in a seven part series detailing our objections to plans by the United States Environmental Protection Agency to claim unlimited power over the life of every American. Those plans were laid out in an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), dated July 11, 2008. The EPA is inviting comments to this advance notice. This article explains the third of our six major objections to the EPA plans. The total of our objections, including our letter, our comments, and a link to the EPA website, may be accessed at: http://www.classicalideals.com/EPA_Ruination.htm
 
 
Comment Number Three: There Is No “Consensus” Among Scientists
 
We oppose these measures on scientific grounds, because the assertions of a man-made global warming crisis are opposed by some of the best scientific minds in the world. There is no “consensus” among scientists that man-made global warming is a crisis requiring government intervention.           
 
The most accomplished, senior, and expert scientists in climatology and related fields have gone on record to state that human action is NOT changing the climate. Many of them have paid a professional price for their candor. Their voices are unacknowledged in the press, and have carried almost no weight in the political deliberations.
 
Claims by the advocates of man-made global warming that a scientific “consensus” exists are false. These claims reveal the dishonesty of the advocates of man-made global warming and reveal their political motivations. If they refuse to admit that their own colleagues who do not agree with them even exist, why should we accept that they are accurate in their scientific conclusions?
 
Concern over so-called greenhouse gases began in 1827, when Jean-Baptiste Fourier coined the metaphor “greenhouse effect.”[1] Around 1860 John Tyndall suggested that a cause of the ice ages might be a decrease in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. But chemist and physicist Svante Arrhenius first speculated that atmospheric CO2 might affect surface temperatures.[2]
 
Arrhenius’ calculated, in 1896, that doubling atmospheric CO2 would increase temperatures 9 to 11