Anonymous public comment

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD 2012-0879 It is appalling that EPA continues to promote these kinds of expenditures which are based on such faulty premises. The entire basis of this report is the summary findings of the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). There is a huge and growing amount of published scientific literature that provides ample evidence that the summary findings of the IPCC report cited in the Executive Summary and the Introduction are most likely false. Temperatures continue to be well within historic ranges, there has been no increase in the average temperature of the earth the in past decade, man- made greenhouse gases represent less than 1% of greenhouse effect, and the Antarctic icecap (which holds 90% of Earth’s ice compared to the Arctic ice with only 1-2%) has been expanding for 30 years. The numerous and extensive flaws in the GCM models have been repeatedly pointed out in the scientific literature, they fail to duplicate either the Medieval Warm Period or the Little Ice Age (which there is significant scientific evidence to show were global events). EPA fails to even acknowledge the huge amount of scientific information that is contrary to their option. EPA has a duty to use the best available scientific information and their continued failure to do so indicates an alarming bigoted and prejudice behavior. For EPA to continue to spend precious resources using such poor science is an egregious display of disregard for both science and the well being of our nation. There are many hundreds of peer review scientific articles referenced on sites like www.co2science.org, www.heartland.org, www.nipccreport.org and www.marshall.org which disagreed with the conclusions of the IPCC. One example; Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, Arthur B. Robinson, Noah E. Robinson Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (2007) 12, 79-90,