Stossel Re-Airing on FoxNews, Sunday Afternoon

March 23rd, 2012 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

As expected, I was in the final segment of the 1 hour show last night, which will air again on Fox News Channel this Sunday (March 25) at 5 a.m. and 3 p.m. EDT.

20 Responses to “Stossel Re-Airing on FoxNews, Sunday Afternoon”

Toggle Trackbacks

  1. Ansgar John says:

    Burt Rutan (SpaceShipOne Designer) studies CAGW (Catastrofic AGW) as a hobby. His views are not the same as those of Richard Branson who is commercializing SpaceShipTwo. Here is an interesting debate Rutan had online:

  2. Ted Gilles says:

    Our cable service doesn’t have Fox Business News. Can a transcript be provided? Thanks.

  3. Toby says:

    What a relief, Roy, that you have not taken up political advocacy like that Hansen fellow.

  4. Mises Scholar says:

    “On Dennis Miller’s radio show Thursday Lord Christopher Monckton, a former policy adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and an activist against global warming “alarmism,” went all-in on questioning President Barack Obama’s citizenship.

    “… the 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley hinted about his position on the issue in April 2010 at a tea party rally on the National Mall near the White House.
    But on Miller’s show, he said the birth certificate issue was far more important that combatting so-called anthropogenic global warming.

    “I mean, hey you got a president who has a false birth certificate on the Internet, on the White House website,” Monckton said. “It’s not even clear where he was born…

    “… Miller protested by saying he disagreed with the suggestion that Obama has a fraudulent birth certificate. But Monckton dug in his heels.

    “I don’t know whether he is Kenyan or not,” Monckton said.

    “The point is that if I were you, I would want to make absolutely sure that he was born here before allowing him to be elected. And the birth certificate that he put up on that website, I don’t know where he was born. But I do know that birth certificate isn’t genuine.”

    Monckton firmly asserted that the birth certificate on the White House website wasn’t real, and claimed it could be dismantled with software.

    “It appears in layers on the screen in such a way you can remove quite separately each of the individual dates,”

    Monckton said.

    “You use Adobe Illustrator and each of the individual dates is in its own separate layer. This thing has been fabricated. Sheriff [Joe] Arpaio of Arizona has had a team on this for six months. And he has now gone public and said there’s something very desperately wrong with this and of course nobody is saying anything because the entire electorate has been fooled.”

    “… I haven’t a clue where Obama was born and I wouldn’t want to entreat into the private grief behind investigating. But the point is, is what he has done on the White House website is he has put up a document which he is plainly a forgery and I would regard that as a very serious matter.”

  5. Joe Born says:

    No luck this morning. The portion of the Stossel show that presumably feature Dr. Spencer was pre-empted by an O’Bama-Lee communique.

  6. Ola,

    Adorei o seu artigo, parabens!
    Quero recomendar a todos este artigo interessante:


  7. Joe Born, same here but we’ll catch it at 5pm ET.
    Thanks Dr. Spencer!

  8. I meant 3pm ET. Sorry.

  9. Joe Bastardi says:

    Question now is, who will play you when they make a movie about all this

    In the end, I think the global temp, by 2030 will fall back to where it was in the 70s as measured objectively by satellites and the whole co2 thing will be a moot point. The problem is that as long as they can run for cover of natural variability, they will lie cheat and steal their way to what they are seeking, which is earth control and birth control. There is a far deeper agenda here and people with that kind of zeal wont be stopped, no matter what the data says.

  10. Doug Cotton says:

    Long wave (low frequency) radiation from a source in the atmosphere which is colder than the ice will neither melt nor warm the ice. So how can it affect sea levels.

    You can see this from the fact that even much higher intensity low frequency radiation in a microwave oven does not mely ice as discussed in a series of posts here

    where you will read an explanation of how a microwave oven heats water by friction, not absorption.

  11. WillyW says:


    It is not that the down-welling radiation is itself providing enough heat to melt the ice, but rather it is a change in the overall net energy balance. Any two objects facing each other and at a non-zero temperature are emitting radiation at each other. Depending on their properties they are also absorbing some of that radiation and either reflecting or allowing some to pass through (transparency). A greenhouse material such as glass or CO2 is mostly transparent to visible light, but absorbs most of the infra-red light. By letting the sunlight in, the surface below is warmed. That warmed surface emits IR energy, which is mostly absorbed by the glass or CO2 thus being warmed. The warmed greenhouse material then re-emits that IR energy and roughly half of that captured and re-emitted energy goes back down to the surface below and half goes out.

    It is still the original sunlight that is providing the energy, but by catching some of the otherwise “lost” energy and “throwing” it back to the surface a greenhouse material reduces the overall energy loss piece of the equation and the surface does not cool as much as if there were no greenhouse material between the surface and the much colder surroundings (space) beyond. If it were not for feedback mechanisms, this would be a very simple model and the Earth’s surface would have to warm up until the outgoing energy after the capture and re-emission from increased CO2 again equaled the incoming radiation (sunlight). The problem is that the IPCC models claim to have correctly included many very complicated feedback mechanisms and experience shows that they have not.

  12. MarkBofill says:

    Just saw the segment. Well spoken sir! Stossel sounded half asleep, but you did a great job regardless.

  13. KevinK says:

    Dr. Spencer, with respect, well stated Sir. Well balanced and reasonable at the same time.

    As you rightly point out Nature is producing a lot of that Fine Particulate Matter all by itself. Vacuuming the Sahara Dessert to remove the dust sounds like a government employees dream job; no measureable forward progress and unending make work followed by a nice retirement package while the dessert is just as dusty as when you started 30 years before.

    Also good to see you recognize the speculation that the “GHE” SHOULD cause some warming. If of course it turns out that the “GHE” CANNOT NOT cause some warming the whole things falls apart HUH?

    Cheers, Kevin.

  14. Pawel says:

    Tak trzymac dr

  15. steviekm3 says:

    With regards to recent study showing Medieval warming period was global doesn’t this give big support for Svensmark and cosmic rays theory ? Correct me if I’m wrong. Thx.

    I think Spencer had shown some statistical support of Svensmark’s work sometime ago on this site.

  16. Mary says:

    wow this is so crazy. I love your info because we are trying to write a essay if it is man made or natural. I hyopthesis that it is manmade.

  17. molly says:

    I love your website…IT’S SO COOL!!!

  18. bully says:

    I used to write a ledger on this subject. I need to find it. Awesome Post!!

  19. Thank you, Ive recently been searching for information about this subject for ages and yours is the greatest I have discovered so far. But, what about the conclusion? Are you sure about the source?

  20. Kiuil says:

    Thank you so much for sharing with us.
    Jen @

Leave a Reply