If you believe that, you are either pretty dense or brainwashed by the current administration.....The policies were either cancelled or the renewal premiums went up drastically due to changes mandated by the ACA, the insurance companies were forced to do this by the administration, not something of their own choosing.....Simply blaming it on insurance companies is very short sighted. After all, they are in bed with the current administration...Same thing is going to happen when employer sponsored health insurance policies are forced to make changes in coverages & premiums due to the ACA.... My wife's carrier has already indicated that will be happening when their renewals come up in April. The administration said originally that they wanted the "30 million" uninsured individuals to be covered. Well, they did more than that, they have changed the entire landscape of Health insurance & not for the better. Yeah, people who had "pre-existing" conditions can now get health insurance, and some "preventative procedures" are now covered at 100%, but the non preventative procedures that people will get are going to put them in the poorhouse, what with the high deductibles, copays & out of pocket maximums they will be required to pay before the insurance companies even pay out a dime. Guess what happens then, they don't pay their bills & we have the same situation all over again. Plus the issue of people in the country illegally hasn't been address. Those 11 million plus people, plus those who choose to pay the penalty & those who slip between the cracks between being able to get subsidies or qualifying for Medicare (since not all States are obligated to expand it), will continue to use the Emergency rooms as doctors offices & we as taxpayers will continue to pay for it.... Thus this whole ACA thing is a waste...

For an amateur project, I spent two years looking at global warming data from all sorts of original science papers. My conclusion was that global warming is the greatest scientific hoax ever perpetrated on the public. I also discovered that almost everybody I encounter who believes in global warming hasn't the foggiest clue of even the most basic salient facts as evidenced by some of the posts here. For example, both Arctic and Antarctic ice are actually expanding, sea level has risen by the same rate of 8 inches per century for roughly the last thousand years and recently seems to have stalled, and there has been no significant increase in temperature world-wide in 18 years (during the entire time of this debate).
The most revealing thing about the Climate Gate scandal is that global warming advocate scientists are seeking to hide their research rather than share it. If you knew that the Earth was in peril wouldn't you want to scream it from the rooftops? Why would you be ashamed of your methodology? Surely if you have confidence in the science you could just put it all out there and everyone would understand!
In the same vein, I have noticed that many people are disappointed to hear that temperatures and sea levels have stalled. You would think that this would be the greatest news story since the fall of Nazi Germany and the Berlin Wall!

If you had actually read the man's words you would have noticed that his main argument was that the scientists of the IPCC allow no opposing arguments argue away dissent by claiming consensus.
Furthermore, they have tested their hypotheses only through computer simulations, which have their own problems.
Finally, he states that the IPCC scientists did not include certain facts pertaining to the sun's output aside from its electromagnetic radiation.
I can't say whether or not his arguments are accurate, but he never denied global warming or a human part in it.
Bill

That's one of the problems of being an amateur Steven! It is very easy to pick up on headline 'science facts' in the press/online (your 'research') as you have done and then create a fantasy storyline in you mind to support your previously held hunches/suspicions.

The professionals however don't have it so easy. They have to collect hard evidential data, process it and then come to a published conclusion that gets 'peer reviewed' by the entire relevant scientific community before it gains acceptance or otherwise.

Can I recommend that you increase the scope of your research to include more than press releases (often journalists struggling unsuccessfully to not get the wrong end of the stick). Many reputable weather centres and broadcasting stations from the US, Europe and elsewhere have very accessible websites that will lead amateurs gently through the arguments, problems and evidence that lead to the 'probabilities' of future climate change. Yes, sorry, mathematical probability is a another subject that you are likely to need to brush up on if you are hoping to get on the bottom rung of the ladder of this debate.

Good luck - I am sure you will let us know how you get on!