Obama's Grin -- and Flaws or Overstatements Re: Global Warming

I have been of late taking quite a bit of flack on a small issue, but an issue dear to my heart. Here's the thing. We all watched President Obama in his State of the Union Address, just a short while back. He made several wonderful points! But he made a reference to the ever changing concern of Global Warming" only once. Now I claimed at the time, and indeed still claim that during that single reference he word a "Sheepish Grin". It was a very "Sheepish Grin", and it reinforced my view that the mystery of Global Warming is fast unraveling, and to some skeptics (myself included) it becomes obvious that the Threat of "Global Warming" is either a considerable overstatement, or the shadow of a clear and distinct fraud.
From His State of the Union Address: "I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. But here's the thing -- even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future..."

Since our President as are the rest of us becoming wary of this global predicament, decried by the bored environmentalists, he wore, as he spoke those words a "Sheepish Grin"!
Here are a slew of the reasons for my interpretation
I published an article recently in which I stated that the American liberals were the "last hope of a desperate planet". Now we see new evidence that their plans, to span several decades, or generations, and to be costly indeed, may well be the most insidious scam yet perpetrated on the American Public, and the people of the world,
I knew there was some cause for alarm when I noticed that the plight of the stranded polar bears was aimed primarily at the children of the world. The glaciers are melting they claimed. The low places on the planet would soon be uninhabitable - under water. The Polar Bear population would drown in a frozen ocean, devoid of areas of safety for them and their offspring.
The current revelation that the basis for alarm was deliberately overstated overshadows all previous inconsistencies and in our modern world where scientific principles are assumed automatic, this is unforgivable. The reference is to the melting of the Himalayan glaciers and the catastrophic catastrophes that would result.
This is a direct quote from a New York Times article dated January 20, 2010:
GENEVA (AP) -- "A U.N. warning that Himalayan glaciers were melting faster than any other place in the world and may be gone by 2035 was not backed up by science, U.N. climate experts said Wednesday -- an admission that could energize climate change critics.
"In a 2007 report, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said the Himalayan glaciers are very likely to disappear within three decades if the present melting rate continues. But a statement from the panel now says there is not enough scientific evidence to back up those claim.
"The warning in the report 'refers to poorly substantiated estimates of rate of recession and date for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers,' the IPCC said.' In drafting the paragraph in question, the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly.'

This information I offer in correlation and collaboration with more from the Times
"..Gore, American Vice President under Bill Clinton, and Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2007 for his Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, produced a movie, An Inconvenient Truth, to illustrate what he felt was the catastrophic threat of climate change to life on Earth. After the movie won an Academy Award for "Best Documentary", Gore then sought to have the movie shown in Public Schools. The use of the movie in schools was ruled upon by High Court (London) Judge Justice Burton. This High Court London Judge called An Inconvenient Truth "alarmist" and "exaggerated". He said the film was "one-sided" and would breach education rules unless accompanied by a warning. Ruling that the film could be shown in schools as part of the climate change resource pack, Mr. (Judge) Justice Burton warned it must be accompanied by new guidance notes to balance Mr. Gore's partisan views. Without the warning, he said, the film would breach education rules. At that time the London Judge pointed out nine specific errors in the Oscar Winning motion picture. To elaborate:
1. Gore said the sea level could be expected to rise - owing to melting ice sheets - by 20 feet in the "near future". The Judge said this change would only take place only over millennia.
2. Gore said low lying atolls would need be, and already have been in some cases, evacuated. Burton said no such evacuations have taken place.
3. Gore: The Gulf Stream that warms the Atlantic will shut down. Burton: Unlikely that the Stream will shut down, although it may slow in coming years.
4. Graphs that Gore produced were shown irrelevant.
5. Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro was the result of "Human-induced climate change." Burton: That claim can not be proved nor corroborated.
6. Al Gore: "The drying up of Lake Chad is a prime example of the catastrophic result of Global Warming". Burton: "No evidence to prove the contention"
7. Gore stated that Global Warming produced Hurricane Katrina. The Judge found no evidence.
8. Polar bears were drowning, swimming distances of up to 60 miles in search of ice. Judge Justice Burton indicates that a total of 4 bears had drowned; that in a storm.
9. Coral reefs were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. Burton "It is not possible to separate global warming from other causes, particularly, over-fishing."
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it wasn't a "Sheepish Grin"; but to me it looked like a grin, very sheepish indeed!
My deepest sympathies to Albert Noble, who as they say, may well be turning over in his (no disrespect intended) grave.