I totally agree with you. This text is not credible, it's not professional and absolutely no sources are listed... I went on the "About" section of this website to discover this American Policy Center is only a private organisation proning the free capitalism, protesting against any political intervention that could affect individual and corporative profit, including environment issues. This center is against immigration, against the UN, for the war... they only want the readers to become some "G.W.Bush" impersonations, but even more radical.

On the other side though, a majority of environmental organizations such as Greenpeace also are very engaged and their theories is tainted with subjectivity. They encourage massive socialism and radical changes in our lifestyle that are, in my opinion, way exaggerated. Those organizations never say that volcano eruptions are responsible of a huge part of the nocive gas shot in the atmosphere, and accuse the humanity as being responsible of the major part of this pollution.

In fact, those who want to talk about global warming should point out some credible scientific stucies with objective content and results we can trust, not only shooting some random links with data fitting their own opinion.

global warming doesn't mean an overall warming of the planet at all times
summer will be warmer
winter will be colder

it's a misleading simplification

and as to the post saying that water vapor is a greenhouse gas
water vapor is present in larger than normal historical quantities because of 1) humans releasing more of it into the atmosphere as a result of burning fossil fuels (H20 gas is a byproduct of this reaction) and because the higher than normal temperatures caused by the presence of all the other greenhouse gases facilitates the production and maintence of water as a gas in the atmosphere

without trying to simplify this too much or making an unfair analogy this is basically the mac vs pc argument
where two sides who have absolutely no knowledge or scientific background will pass judgement on something based purely on which side they think seems more believable or in line with their previous assertions

Douglas Adams put this best:
"We don't have to save the world. The world is big enough to look after itself. What we have to be concerned about is whether or not the world we live in will be capable of sustaining us in it."

lol you didn't capitalize american, i'm offended.

i also still think there's some amount of global warming. even if there wasn't global warming he still says that all the ice will melt eventually, where does the water go?
and so we're still stuck with the negative effects of global warming ie whole world flooding

anyone who thinks global warming is the only reason to reduce carbon emissions etc. is a complete dickhole and founding their opinions on the same baseless notions as the people they criticise for the opposite belief.

He loses.