Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

So not only is all the AGW science the only good science available, but it is now "fact"!

Coming from one that is totally enslaved to the material chains of the 9-5 office cubicle and the constant whims of his spouse, don't mean shet.

Your data stinks of hypocrisy. And demands that I accept or we will die.

Your AGW data stinks of hypocrisy and self loathing. It allows no other science than it's own kind to speak and prevail. Worse, it demands that I accept or we will die.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

How much C02 is your office building pouring into the atmosphere as we speak.

The two post above yours purely exemplify why I and so many others do not want anything to do with this AGW science.

Were you thinking of "WE" when you last put the key into the ignition, turned it over, fired up the fossil fuel burning pistons and vrooooooooom, off you went. Adding that much more C02 to the atmosphere that is going to kill us all.

There sure is a lot of we here. But the folks claiming all this weism are just as much to blame than the next guy. In some cases, are the worse offenders out there.

Why do you guys even try to seriously discuss this issue with blow hards like the Chief? It's just a frustrating waste of time and energy.

He basically just ignore or dodges any fact or inquiry he doesn't like then fesses up that he doesn't give a rats ass about it anyway because of some kind of great spirit or something or whatever in the sky.

Roy Spencer
..
Spencer and the "Interfaith Stewardship Alliance"
Spencer is listed as a "scientific advisor" for an organization called the "Interfaith Stewardship Alliance" (ISA). According to their website, the ISA is "a coalition of religious leaders, clergy, theologians, scientists, academics, and other policy experts committed to bringing a proper and balanced Biblical view of stewardship to the critical issues of environment and development."

Opposition to evolution and embrace of "intelligent design"
Spencer has been an active in advocating Intelligent Design over evolution, and he argues that its teaching should be mandatory in schools[10]. Working with the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance, Spencer has been part of an effort to advocate environmental policy that is based on a "Biblical view" rather than science. As a defender of the pseudoscience of "Intelligent Design" creationism, Spencer has asserted that the scientific theory of evolution is really just a kind of religion.[11]

Spencer is a proponent of intelligent design as the mechanism for the origin of species.[25] On the subject, Spencer wrote in 2005, "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. . . . In the scientific community, I am not alone. There are many fine books out there on the subject. Curiously, most of the books are written by scientists who lost faith in evolution as adults, after they learned how to apply the analytical tools they were taught in college."[25] In The Evolution Crisis, a compilation of five scientists who reject evolution, Spencer states: "I finally became convinced that the theory of creation actually had a much better scientific basis than the theory of evolution, for the creation model was actually better able to explain the physical and biological complexity in the world... Science has startled us with its many discoveries and advances, but it has hit a brick wall in its attempt to rid itself of the need for a creator and designer."[26]