Scientific studies reveal that much of the consensus on Global Warming was based on Earth's Climate Sensitivity which is considered to be too high but the satellite data reveals us otherwise.

Now we must understand the theory behind Global Warming first. It starts with an assumption that Earth naturally maintains a constant average temperature based on the balance between the amount of sunlight absorbed and the amount of infrared radiation emitted. To maintain this balance and support Global Warming Theory, precipitation systems should respond in some way. Commenting on CO2 concentration, only very little amount is present in Earth's atmosphere (say 39 in 100,000 molecules of air) and it takes 4-5 years to increase that number by 1, if human activities are to be considered. That itself is present in one of the IPCC reports.

If we concentrate on Climate shifts, we should bring our concentration on Pacific Decadal Oscillation. It shows that there are positive and negative shifts each time when imbalance occurs in nature just to counterbalance the effect. Our observation on temperature rise started very late in 1977 and by that time a series of shifts had also occurred.

We know United States of America is a big country with bigger dreams of ruling the world. However, IPCC once had itself doubted about human cause for Global Warming. Nevertheless, IPCC had to withdraw its statement soon due to political intervention while writing summary to various assessment reports in 1994-95, especially when second assessment report came. Later debates over the issue of corrupted data on estimation of value of statistical life was also aroused but later suppressed by government bodies by intervening in summary report for policy making.

The first assessment report didn't bring out the effect of anthropogenic aerosols but was suggested in second assessment report. Debates started for estimation over value of a statistical life. With the third assessment report debates over estimation of economic growth (based on market exchange rates) and flaws in physical modeling was revealed. Various flaws in physical models discussed in Chapter 7 and 8 of the report was deleted in summary reports.

However, fourth assessment report was widely accepted but that was based on assumptions on third assessment report which was controversial. The fourth assessment report was later debated inside IPCC itself and series of technical flaws were detected on calculating 2035 glacier meltdown which is now being retracted by IPCC itself. But this has made many countries to take different stands in Copenhagen Summit. The fifth assessment report is due on 2014 and we have to closely examine the reports keeping in mind the flaws detected earlier in reports.

We in scientific world should not take everything for granted only by trusting that these reports and studies are based on foreign countries and they are much advanced on technological front but should also consider the fact that these studies are carried out by richer nations who themselves are mutated for growing business. The latest world meet at Copenhagen reveals much of these findings as U.S.A didn't agree to much of what the reports claim but pressurized other countries to follow and that shows the Political D.N.A is running behind these findings.#