Roy W. Spencer
- Ph.D., Meteorology, University of Wisconsin-Madison (1981). 
Roy W. Spencer is a research scientist at the University of Alabama, Huntsville. He operates his own blog  on global warming in which he describes himself as a “climatologist, author, [and] former NASA scientist.”
Spencer believes that “the extra carbon dioxide we pump into the atmosphere is not enough to cause the observed warming in the last 100 years.”
Stance on Climate Change
“There's probably a natural reason for global warming … We will look back on it as a gigantic false alarm … The Earth isn't that sensitive to how much CO2 we put into the atmosphere. I think we need to consider the possibility that more carbon dioxide is better than less.” 
“We see something change in our climate and we blame ourselves … I don't think we understand what happens. We can watch it happen on the (climate) models, we know it happens, but we don't know for sure how it happens.” 
“Politicians and some of the scientists like to say that there's a consensus now on global warming or the science has been settled, but you have to ask them, what is there a consensus on? Because it really makes a difference. What are you talking about? The only consensus I`m aware of is that it's warmed in the last century. They completely ignore the fact that there's this thing called the Oregon petition that was signed by 19,000 professionals and scientists who don't agree with the idea that we are causing climate change.” 
“Twice I have testified in congress that unbiased funding on the subject of the causes of warming would be much closer to a reality if 50% of that money was devoted to finding natural reasons for climate change.” 
In a February 20, 2014 blog post titled, “Time to push back against the global warming Nazis ,” Spencer wrote:
When politicians and scientists started calling people like me “deniers”, they crossed the line. They are still doing it.
They indirectly equate (1) the skeptics’ view that global warming is not necessarily all manmade nor a serious problem, with (2) the denial that the Nazi’s extermination of millions of Jews ever happened.
Too many of us for too long have ignored the repulsive, extremist nature of the comparison. It’s time to push back.
I’m now going to start calling these people “global warming Nazis”.
Dr Spencer gave evidence to the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works  session on climate change. During the hearing (at 3hr 20s), Dr Spencer was asked by Democrat committee member Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: “Do you believe that the theory of creation actually has a much better scientific basis than the theory of evolution”.
The question was apparently in reference to an article which Spencer had written several years earlier  in which he stated the “theory of creation actually had a much better scientific basis than the theory of evolution”.
Spencer answered that he believed that “evolutionary theory is mostly religion” and that the DNA molecule could not have happened “by chance”. He also claimed that if he was placed in a debate, he would be able to offer more scientific evidence “supporting that life was created” than an opponent could offer that life had evolved.
In July 2011, a paper co-authored by Spencer was published in the journal Remote Sensing, “[which is] a fine [peer-reviewed] journal for geographers, but it does not deal with atmospheric and climate science,” RealClimate found . 
His paper looked at a potential connection between clouds and global warming. The paper received significant media attention, and climate change skeptics claimed that it “blow[s] a gaping hole in global warming alarmism.” 
Within three days of the publication of Spencer & Braswell's paper, two climate scientists (Kevin Trenberth & John Fasullo) repeated the analysis  and showed that the IPCC models are in agreement with the observations, so refuting Spencer's claims.
In Andrew Dessler's view, “[This] paper is not really intended for other scientists, since they do not take Roy Spencer seriously anymore (he’s been wrong too many times). Rather, he’s writing his papers for Fox News, the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, Congressional staffers, and the blogs. These are his audience and the people for whom this research is actually useful — in stopping policies to reduce GHG emissions — which is what Roy wants.” 
In response to the flawed peer review that allowed the publication of the paper, the Editor-in-Chief of Remote Sensing stepped down. He had this to say: (PDF) 
“After having become aware of the situation, and studying the various pro and contra arguments, I agree with the critics of the paper. Therefore, I would like to take the responsibility for this editorial decision and, as a result, step down as Editor-in-Chief of the journal Remote Sensing.
With this step I would also like to personally protest against how the authors and like-minded climate sceptics have much exaggerated the paper’s conclusions in public statements…” 
Spencer published The Great Global Warming Blunder : How Mother Nature Fooled the World's Top Climatologists which is prominently advertised on his blog.
Apart from concluding that global warming is likely caused by a natural cycle, Blunder poses the question, that “maybe putting more CO2 in the atmosphere is a good thing.”
Spencer published Climate Confusion : How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians, and Misguided Policies that Hurt the Poor in 2008.
March 8, 2007
Roy Spencer appeared on the The Great Global Warming Swindle  to talk about the “Great Science Funding Conspiracy.” Spencer claims  that “climate scientists need there to be a problem in order to get funding.”
Swindle received critical response from the scientific community, including a letter  addressed to ABC signed by thirty-seven British Scientists that claimed “the misrepresentations of facts and views, both of which occur in your programme, are so serious that repeat broadcasts of the programme, without amendment, are not in the public interest. In view of the seriousness of climate change as an issue, it is crucial that public debate about it is balanced and well-informed.”
ABC Australia’s Tony Jones also brings the film's scientific accuracy into question  in an interview with the film’s director, Martin Durkin.
February 28, 2007
Roy Spencer was interviewed on Rush Limbaugh's Show. See an excerpt below: 
RUSH: You called yesterday and you wanted to say that my instincts on this global warming as you've heard me discuss them, are accurate. You started a discussion of the calculations here, these climate models, saying that they do not factor – because it's not easy to do or maybe it's not even possible to factor – in the role of precipitation and clouds. Could you start there, and basically whatever you were going to say yesterday, go ahead and launch.
DR. SPENCER: Well, I feel like – and there are a few of us that are like this – that the Earth has a natural air-conditioning process which occurs that is mainly through precipitation systems. Now, people will think, “Oh, well, you mean when they come by they cool off the air,” and that's not what I'm talking about. It's about the Earth's natural greenhouse effect which is mostly water vapor and clouds. The Earth has a natural greenhouse effect that keeps the surface of the Earth warm.
RUSH: Isn't it true that the majority of greenhouse gases do come from the sources you just mentioned, not manmade sources?
DR. SPENCER: Well, yeah, that's true. Carbon dioxide is a relatively small part of the Earth's natural greenhouse effect… .
There's a big problem with [the accepted explanation for the greenhouse effect], though. It makes it sound like the greenhouse effect is what determines the temperature of the Earth, and actually the truth is it's more the other way around. Given a certain amount of sunlight coming in, that is mostly absorbed at the surface of the Earth, weather processes happen which create the greenhouse effect because most of the greenhouse effect is from evaporated water which then turns into clouds, and of course water vapor is a strong greenhouse gas.
RUSH: I dare say I have to interrupt you at this point because most people who only pay attention to the crisis mongers, believe that there is no greenhouse effect other than that created by man. The whole notion of the greenhouse effect has led people to believe that man has totally manufactured this and that it's totally harmful. What you're saying is it's a natural thing that helps keep the Earth's temperatures moderate?
DR. SPENCER: Yeah, that's right. That's right. All the scientists agree with that. What you're talking about is the fact that the media distorts things so much that people don't get the right information. If you're using the media to rely on to get the science about this issue, you won't.
December 13, 2007
The letter states that “it is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity throughout the ages.”
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.”
In July 2006, Spencer co-authored an ISA report refuting the work of another religious organization called the Evangelical Climate Initiative . The ISA report was titled A Call to Truth, Prudence and Protection of the Poor: an Evangelical Response to Global Warming. Along with the report was a letter of endorsement signed by numerous representatives of various organizations, including six that have received a total of $2.32 million in donations from ExxonMobil  over the last three years. 
Roy Spencer was one of the 60 “accredited experts” to sign a 2006 open letter  to Prime Minister Stephen Harper denying man-made climate change while urging the government avoid implementing climate policy.
The letter states that “climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural 'noise.'”
According to an August 12, 2005 New York Times  article, Spencer, along with another well-known “skeptic,” John Christy , admitted they made a mistake in their satellite data research that they said demonstrated a cooling in the troposphere (the earth's lowest layer of atmosphere). It turned out that the exact opposite was occurring and the troposphere was getting warmer. 
“These papers should lay to rest once and for all the claims by John Christy and other global warming skeptics that a disagreement between tropospheric and surface temperature trends means that there are problems with surface temperature records or with climate models,” said Alan Robock, a meteorologist at Rutgers University.
November 16, 2004
The letter concludes that any past warming that occurred in the arctic cannot be attributed to greenhouse gas concentrations. It was signed by prominent climate change skeptics including Richard Lindzen , Tim Ball , David Legates , Pat Michaels , Gary D. Sharp , Willie Soon  and Sallie Baliunas .
Spencer appeared as a “Featured Expert” in a video by the Greening Earth Society  (a project of the Western Fuels Association) called The Greening of Planet Earth Continues. In the video, “expert scientists assert that CO2 is not a pollutant, but a nutrient to life on earth.” 
Spencer has published numerous research articles in peer-reviewed journals on the subject of satellite climate measurements.
“About ,” Drroyspencer.com. Accessed February, 2012.
David Klepper, “Expert: We must act fast on warming,” The Wichita Eagle (Kansas), September 24, 2008. Printed by the uptown neighbourhood association (PDF ).
Wendy Reeves. “Scientist: Warming not caused by humans ,” The Huntsville Times, April 19, 2007. Archived April 22, 2007.
“Exposed: The Climate of Fear ,” CNN, Glenn Beck special, May 2, 2007.
Roy W. Spencer. “Why Most Published Research Findings are False ,” Drroyspencer.com, January 3, 2011.
“Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedback ,” RealClimate, July 29, 2011.
Scott Mandia. “Spencer & Braswell 2011: Proof that global warming is exaggerated? Or just bad science? ”, Global Warming: Man or Myth?, August 3, 2011.
Joe Romm. “Climate Scientists Debunk Latest Bunk by Denier Roy Spencer ,” ThinkProgress, July 29, 2011.
Wolfgang Wagner. “Taking Responsibility on Publishing the Controversial Paper 'On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance” by Spencer and Braswell, Remote Sens. 2011, 3(8), 1603-1613” (PDF ), Remote Sensing (Editorial), September 2, 2011.
“Watch Out For Global Warming Muths! ”, Irregular Times, February 20, 2009.
“Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations ,” December 13, 2007. Reprinted by the Science & Public Policy Institute.
Brian Kaylor. “Signers of Environmental Statement Funded by ExxonMobil ,” EthicsDaily.com, October 8, 2006. Archived May 6, 2008.
“Climate Experts Respond to Arctic Climate Impact Assessment ,” PrNewswire, November 16, 2004. Republished by the Frontier Center for Public Policy, November 20, 2004.
“The Greening of Planet Earth Continues ,” Co2 Science. Accessed February, 2012.
“Board of Advisors ,” Cornwall Alliance For the Stewardship of Creation. Accessed February 10, 2014.
“Roy Spencer ,” Tech Central Station. Archived May 6, 2007.
“Experts ,” ICECAP. Accessed February, 2012.
“Heartland Experts: Roy Spencer ,” The Heartland Institute. Accessed February, 2012.
“Dr. Roy Spencer ,” George C. Marshall Institute. Accessed February, 2012.
“Deniers:Scientists:Roy W. Spencer ,” ExxonSecrets Wiki.
“Roy Spencer ,” Wikipedia entry.