Both of which are true statements.
So you don't believe in evolution? So you believe the fossils in the natural museum of history are fake?
One does not imply the other. As I typed before I have
reservations about evolution as a
cause of speciation - nor am I the only one. As to the nature of the fossils, I have no reason to beleive they are anything but genuine - where, pray tell, are the transitional forms?
Neither of which have anything to do with his credentials for generating and interpreting satellite measurments - for which he LITERALLY wrote the book.
And Karry Mullis wrote the book on PCR and won a noble prize. He testified on behalf of OJ Simpson, claims HIV doesn't cause aids, says both the ozone and global warming are bunk, and talks to glowing racoons.
Regardless WHAT glowing animals he speaks to, he is 100% correct about global warming and the ozone hole.
He has even better credentials than roy spencer. Are you going to believe him too? I mean he wrote the book on DNA so if he says OJ is innocent then surely OJ is innocent right? Credentials are not everything. There are a lot of scientists on the planet and some of them go crazy. This is why peer review and assessment reports are so important.
If you think politics and fads have NO EFFECT on publishing and peer review, I have some low tide land in Florida I'd like to sell you....
If there is anything to know about satellite IR, he knows it...and he says Global Warming is bunk.
So are you implying satellite data says global warming is bunk? Please show me the data. Not even Richard Lindzen is dumb/crazy enough to say that.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=170Cliff notes: some satellites were falling in altitude and gave false readings.
[/quote]
Cliff notes to your cliff notes: the "correction": for the false readings was vastly overstated according to... Spencer, who is the man who took the readings in the first place.
from da man hisseff:
"Since we (UAH) had already been working on a new diurnal adjustment technique, based upon the newer and more powerful AMSUs that have been flying since 1998, we rushed our new method to completion recently, and implemented new corrections. As a result, the UAH global temperature trends for the period 1979 to the present have increased from +0.09 to +0.12 deg. C/decade -- still below the RSS estimate of +0.19 deg. C/decade.
...
I only hope that the appearance of these three papers together, with considerable overlapping of authorship, does not represent an attempt to make measurements fit theoretical models. For when this happens, actual measurements can no longer fulfill their critical role in independent validation of climate models. Ideally, measurements would be analyzed with no knowledge of what any given theory predicts they should be."
"
from:
http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=312