Well, we have lots of ice, so does that mean that will prevent global warming?
And not only do we have a lot of ice, but each year a lot of ice is made.

A scientific fact is quantifiable.
Let me give you an example. The US produces around 600 million tonnes of wheat per year. A scientific question might be how many tonnes of CO2 is required per year to produce 600 million tonnes of wheat? A rough answer is 1-2 billion tonnes per year, it could be closer to 1.8 billion tonnes. You could use a scientific process to try to get a more exact number- it wouldn't be easy to get a precise answer because you need to isolate all the various varibles- microorganisms would a significant factor.

BUT I happen to know that NASA was studying wheat growing for life support goals.
Therefore by entering "Wheat production O2 NASA" into Google's search engine, I get the 10th entry:
"The chamber has operated continuously during each crop test for a total of over 1000 days without any major failures. Throughout these tests, the plants produced approximately 400 kg of total biomass, 160 kg of edible biomass (approximately 250 person-day (pd) equivalents), and 440 kg of O2 (approximately 512 pd equivalents), while removing 610 kg of CO2"
http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/102212855.html

So for 160 edible biomass it removed 610 Kg of CO2.
610 divide by 160 gives 3.8125. I could times 600 million tonnes times 3.8125, but instead realizing this isn't precise and desire to be conservative in my numbers, I'll just round it off to 3. And 3 would probably work fairly well for other crops, corn, beets, lumber, whatever. Now, if Bowser or any other poster would like to provide more exact information I would be happy to to listen- and we could actually discuss scientific facts rather than "Well-known scientifical fack"