OK

It's not often you'll see someone on DK hawking a book that says that says global warming is hysteria. And that it hurts the poor people, so that's reason to keep importing the oil.

Photobucket

And you're not going to see it now, either. To understand what this book is, you have to understand what the author is doing. And to understand that, you need to know what he has previously done.

More on the other side. If tearing a fundie a new a-hole is your idea of fun, this is going to be fun.

The author of this little treatise is Doctor Roy Spencer. Who's he? Glad you asked.

Roy Spencer is a principal research scientist for University of Alabama in Huntsville. In the past, he served as Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Dr. Spencer is the recipient of NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement.

He is principally known for his satellite-based temperature monitoring work, for which he was awarded the American Meteorological Society's Special Award.

Sounds good so far. The next sentence might come as a surprise, then..

He is also a vocal supporter of intelligent design and is skeptical of the view that human activity is primarily responsible for global warming.

Seeing as Wikipedia has them in that order, I'll address them in that order.

Creationism - in 2005, Roy Spencer wrote this article, entitled "Faith-Based Evolution"...

Twenty years ago, as a PhD scientist, I intensely studied the evolution versus intelligent design controversy for about two years. And finally, despite my previous acceptance of evolutionary theory as "fact," I came to the realization that intelligent design, as a theory of origins, is no more religious, and no less scientific, than evolutionism.

Let's get these dates absolutely in order, and I want to use his own idea of time here. In 2005, Spencer said that he had "intensely studied the evolution versus intelligent design controversy for about two years". This means he was studying this issue between 1985 and 1987. This is very important, as you'll see in just a moment.

He says "Intelligent design can be studied and taught without resorting to human creation traditions and beliefs, which in the West are usually traceable to the first book of the Bible, Genesis."

Which is strange, when you look at the original text of the book Of Pandas And People by Percival Davis and Dean H. Kenyon and published by the Texas-based Foundation for Thought and Ethics...

"Devastating" early drafts of a controversial book recommended as reading at a US high school reveal how the word "creationism" had been later swapped for "intelligent design", a landmark US trial scrutinising the teaching of ID heard on Wednesday.

The early drafts of the book Of Pandas and People, were used as evidence to link the book to creationism, which it is illegal to teach in government-funded US schools.

"ID proponents have said for years that they are not creationists," says Nick Matzke of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, California, which is advising 11 parents who are suing the school board of Dover High School in Pennsylvania for incorporating ID into the science curriculum. "This proves beyond a doubt that this is simply a new name for creationism."

What does this have to do with the period 1985-1987?

The early versions of the book were displayed to the court by expert witness for the plaintiffs and creationist historian Barbara Forrest of the Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond. She suggested that they were strong proof that ID is indeed creationism by another name.

Forrest compared early drafts of Of Pandas and People to a later 1987 copy, and showed how in several instances the word "creationism" had been replaced by "intelligent design", and "creationist" simply replaced by "intelligent design proponent".

So when Spencer says he was studying "intelligent design", he was reading material that was chock full of terms like "creationist" and "creationism". The main source in the [f]right winger's library was first called Creation Biology (1983); then Biology and Creation (1986); then, Biology and Origin (1987); and then later in 1987, the authors settled on the final title, Of Pandas and People. And that was when Doctor Roy was doing his reading. Interesting times.

So for a start, the man doesn't even have the courage of his own convictions. Or the balls to say what he really thinks. Or he suffers from revisionist history-itis, which frequently causes the [f]right wing mind to reject reality and replace it with a self-invented version. Even if the REAL reality is available for free on Google.

OK, so the guy's a weasel or a self-loathing creationist. Now let's move on to the science and not make it partisan, shall we?

Oops, it seems Roy can't!

In a New York Post (owned by Rupert Murdoch) opinion column on February 26, 2007, Spencer wrote:

Contrary to popular accounts, very few scientists in the world - possibly none - have a sufficiently thorough, "big picture" understanding of the climate system to be relied upon for a prediction of the magnitude of global warming. To the public, we all might seem like experts, but the vast majority of us work on only a small portion of the problem.

Trying to muddy the water. Otherwise known as FUD. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. No science, nothing peer reviewed. Just insults and sound-bites in a tabloid newspaper, using the #1 Conservative tactic: it takes a second to lie your head off, just a second to spread a lie, but it takes everyone else years to prove the lie wrong. So keep the bullshit coming.

FUD in a Murdoch publication points to a a man that has sold out his scientific credentials for [f]right wing cash. Let's hope he doesn't go to Rush and...

...uh oh. In an interview with conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh on February 28, 2007, Spencer stated that he doesn't believe "catastrophic man-made global warming" is occurring. He also criticized climate models, saying "The people that have built the climate models that predict global warming believe they have sufficient physics in those models to predict the future. I believe they don't. I believe the climate system, the weather as it is today in the real world shows a stability that they do not yet have in those climate models."

Again: no science. Nothing that can be measured, no hypothesis that can be evaluated. Just "I believe". Just more shit-flinging. Him against the world. And I mean that: a 2004 Science magazine study by Professor Naomi Oreskes of the University of California at San Diego looked at 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search "global climate change" at the ISI Web of Science. None rejected the consensus that mankind is responsible for the rapid change. In fact, 75% of the peer-reviewed papers fell into a category "either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view". It's quite literally him against the world.

How much does it take to make a person believe as he does? No ...I don't mean how much life experience or how much thought. I mean money. How much cash?

Roy, as you can see here, is a member of the Heartland Institute and a contributor to the George C. Marshall Institute.

The Heartland Institute is think-tank based in Chicago that accepts donations from individuals, foundations, and corporations. The Institute also studies the implications of the Kyoto Protocol upon national security, which means they scare the easily scared into thinking that Kyoto means the terrorists win. The Institute is partially supported by the Exxon Education Foundation. And what a surprise, they received annual donations from ExxonMobil in amounts ranging from $100,000 to $200,000.

Let's hope the George C. Marshall Institute isn't in ExxonMobil's pocket too. Otherwise we might think Doctor Roy Spencer sold out his worth as a scientists to make a quick buck, and to Hell with the children of tomorrow...

...ah, that didn't last long. In 1999, GMI received grants from the Exxon Education Foundation. In 2000, Exxon Education Foundation gave to them again. During 2002, ExxonMobil donated $90,000 to the Institute, $80,000 of which was for the "Global Climate Change Program", totally run from the ExxonMobil website. The institutes's CEO William O'Keefe, formerly an executive at the American Petroleum Institute and former chairman of the Global Climate Coalition is also a registered lobbyist for ExxonMobil. The Global Climate Coalition, just to let you know, was one of the most outspoken and confrontational industry groups in the United States that battled reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. They also stated (tin-foil hats at the ready) that global warming was a plot to enslave the world under a United Nations-led world government. They disbanded in 2002 but never forgot the dream.

Why no money figures more recent than 2002? It's because the George C. Marshall Institute no longer shows an overview of recent funders. Heaven only KNOWS if any company with a double-x in their name gives now... (cough)

So there we have it. This all reminds me of the case with former NBA referee Tim Donaghy. The guy that took money from Mafia types to steer basketball games to the point where his 'minders' made a lot of cash. I'd be interested to see what Doctor Roy needed the money for. With Referee Tim, it was to pay off debts and loan-sharks. What's the cash for, Roy? You need something that badly? Someone got a secret about you and you need to keep it quiet? I want to know what it is.

Oh, and Doctor Roy - if you ever read this ...you sold out and you know it. You're the Tim Donaghy of the science world. If you ever wanted your name to be historic, this is how you will be remembered. Bravo, Doctor Roy. Bravo.

Can someone send him the link to this page? I want him to know.

Originally posted to ShawnGBR on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 06:39 PM PST.

Poll

Roy Spencer...

44%71 votes
55%89 votes

| 160 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.