More on the Global Climate Emergency: Email from a “Fan”

July 1st, 2016 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

hate_mailI get some hate email from time to time. Actually, not very much. I guess I’m still cruising under the radar.

In response to my post yesterday criticizing Paul Beckwith’s post about the allegedly unprecedented crossing of the equator by jet stream winds (a post which, after much criticism, he has since modified), I received a heartfelt email (reproduced below) asking me to, ummm, back off on my criticism.

This email I received yesterday is rather disturbing because I fear it reveals the low caliber of scientific knowledge that exists out there. Too many people are too easily fooled by pseudo-scientific ramblings which can go viral and cross the globe in a matter of hours. This cuts both ways in the global warming debate, as frequent readers of my blog know I have banned people on my side of the argument for pushing too hard on what I consider to be bad science (e.g. the claim that there is no such thing as the “greenhouse effect”).

Even Jason Samenow from the Capital Weather Gang posted agreement with me that there is nothing unusual about winds at the jet stream level moving back and forth across the equator. Jason also quotes other PhD-level atmospheric scientists in that article.

So, I’m just going to leave this here…I was tempted to answer many of the points made below, but I think it will be more enjoyable for regulars here to take a shot at it.

What A way to treat a fellow scientist. Who the f**k cares if its man made or not! Paul is getting the word out there to people…what are you doing? I don’t see you doing anything except having a web site that no one even knows about…I’ve never heard of you. Paul Beckwith puts a lot of hard work and time into trying to raise the issue…You however are a disgrace to global scientists! Or do you not agree this is an emergency? This one video finally caught some attention and you have to f**k it up…Idiot! We NEED for this to be news so maybe, just maybe something will be done! This video has gone viral…let it be! You have made up lies about him and tried to discredit him…why would you do that??? Many people have moved to the southern hemisphere to get away from the radiation…because this was NOT supposed to happen. You need to take down what you said from your web site! What is happening is dangerous and people need to know…too many people already do not believe GW is real…they need to prepare! They need to know! Jesus Dude…What’s wrong with you? And let’s not throw stones about Donations…You have your own Donation button!!!! Fix it Please…


75 Responses to “More on the Global Climate Emergency: Email from a “Fan””

Toggle Trackbacks

  1. Marcus says:

    Only one word for it – brain dead & anti science

  2. Max says:

    Wow, that guy is gonna blow a vein. I have been looking for your donation button and I can’t find it. Thanks Doc.

    • DAM1953 says:

      Re: blowing a vein. We should only be so lucky.

    • Jimmy Haigh says:

      Has anyone blamed strokes on “global warming” yet? If not, can I make claim? It would go like this: Decreased average global air pressure – because of the increase in CO2 in he atmosphere – causes a greater imbalance between blood pressure and air pressure resulting in more veins being blown. Can I get a grant and tenure please?

  3. The problem with our students being uninformed on basic science, and especially on critical thinking skills, extends to math as well. I’ve had several people who work checkout in stores tell me that young people cannot even count money anymore. We are so busy teaching them what to believe about the issues of the day that we no longer teach them how to think, reason, and solve problems. Professors in universities increasingly have to teach remedial math skills to new students who arrive in college unprepared.

    • DAM1953 says:

      I have preached this to my family so often that they could recite it back…verbatim. Consider that we put a man (actually multiple men) on the moon in the ’60s…..using slide rules. Now, the US doesn’t even have the ability for a manned launch using super computers.

      What really ticks me is that when you make the quality of eduction argument the reply is often “we need to spend more money.” It’s not what you spend but how you spend it.

  4. Steve n says:

    That was great! 🙂 You can tell the guy really believes!! Yet, the critical thinking relative to what he believes is not there (as you noted). I did enjoy the read.

  5. Ass hole!!! If he doesn’t believe in your opinion on climate change then he should keep his fucking mouth shut! Everyone’s entitled to there opinion. Dumb ass Will get it in the end!!!!!!! Those are the people I want to fucking demolish and deserve to burn in hell!!!! What a dick!!!!!

    • Pete Brown says:

      “If he doesnt believe in your opinion on climate change then he should keep his… …mouth shut! Everyones entitled to there opinion.”

      With respect, there is at least one problem with this comment.

      • mpainter says:

        More than one problem. I’ve counted about fourteen, myself. Apparently this person feels than one hysterical, immature, mindless rant should be answered by another.

        • Greg says:

          It could be subtle humor: ridicule by parody.

          Or it could be just someone out to prove that thier are cretins on all sides of the climate non-debate.

          • mpainter says:

            I’m afraid this guy’s 4real.

          • Juraj says:

            compared the number of exclamation marks with the original e-mail i believe it was a parody…

          • mpainter says:

            Well, it is not atypical of him. He has been blogging here a month or two. Roy once called him down. He has described himself as a ” nineteen year old”. I have myself wondered on more than one occasion if he were not intentionally disrupting the thread and seeking to discredit skeptics.

    • Ric Werme says:

      And you’re his evil twin. A fine, equally useless rant.

      And you should have used “their.”

    • PA says:

      Climatechange4realz says:
      July 1, 2016 at 5:52 AM
      Ass hole!!! If he doesnt believe in your opinion on climate change then he should keep his fucking mouth shut! Everyones entitled to there opinion. Dumb ass Will get it in the end!!!!!!! Those are the people I want to fucking demolish and deserve to burn in hell!!!! What a dick!!!!!

      I suppose that venom, ignorance, and insults may form a convincing argument on some of the pro-warming sites.

      On a technically oriented site like this it won’t get a warm reception.

      Perhaps if you were more informed about the science and could form reasoned sentences that at least attempted a rational and persuasive defense of your position you would do better.

  6. Pete Brown says:

    But seriously, we should all be thinking about moving to the southern hemisphere to escape the radiation.

    • yes, it reminds me of the letter I received from a guy in Colorado who was a big renewable energy advocate…he sounded semi-reasonable until his list of energy sources we should be using included “anti-gravity”.

    • Ric Werme says:

      Perhaps we should warn them about the South Atlantic Anomaly and that if the jet stream can cross the equator, the radiation bands can reach ground.

      (After the first paragraph and a half it turned into a disappointingly okay web page.)

    • Mathius says:

      Wouldn’t we get more solar radiation in the southern hemisphere due to the elliptical orbit of the Earth? Perihelion is in the middle of SH summer.

      Just sayin!

      ^ SCIENCE!

    • Erik Aamot says:

      at some point i plan to move to on the equator .. highlands of southwestern Uganda because i like the extra solar radiation and the mild steady temperatures at 2000m elevation

      nice to know though .. if required .. that i can step across the equator southward and escape the radiation if needed

    • PA says:

      Well… “sigh”.

      The problem with anti-nuclear advocacy (among other things) is it has lowered the science IQ of the left, perhaps to the level of being untenable. Apparently it is believed that any increases radiation are bad.

      The 12300 Bq/m3 natural ocean background radioactivity made it pretty obvious to anyone with access to a calculator function that the US wasn’t going be affected by Fukushima site leaks.

      Further, an asphalt road in the summer is emitting peak about 750 W/m2 of thermal energy (VA highway department says 60F over ambient and Arizona studies that are just material testing hit 150F). If surface outgoing IR was lethal someone would have noticed. I’m reticent to accept that the 2 Watts or so claimed by global warmers is going to cause extensive damage.

      I’m not sure whether to be appalled or impressed by the writer. The level of misunderstanding is truly amazing.

      On the other hand it takes cajones of steel to loudly express your opinion when you have such a limited basis for having one.

  7. Proverbs 26:4-5: Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.

  8. Pete Brown says:

    Dr Spencer, have you ever done anything apart from having a website no-one even knows about?

  9. Pete Brown says:

    …oh, and measuring the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere from space…?

  10. David Gray says:

    There are so many things incorrect about that guy’s rant, it would take 15 minutes to properly list them all with the appropriate refutation logic. Others have noted he is lacking critical thinking skills; I’ll just say he is just plain lacking thinking skills. What a dolt.

  11. geran says:

    The email writer is obviously studying to be a “climate scientist”. He’s already got the “fear” thingy going for him. Now, if he can just learn to use words/phrases like “consensus”, “unprecedented”, and “the science is settled”, in a sentence.

    • mpainter says:

      Now we begin to understand how in Salem, Massachusetts, in 1682, 20 person’s were found guilty of witchcraft in a court of law, condemned to be hanged, and then strung up.

      AGW is a modern day witch hunt conducted by modern day witch hunters.

  12. dave says:

    There is unprecedented consensus that the science (of everything) is settled.

  13. dave says:

    Except, we still don’t know what women want.

    Chalky White: “I just don’t understand my wife. Do you understand Flo?”

    Andy Capp: “Dunno. Never tried.”

    • Mayor of Venus says:

      The Peanuts character Lucy told Charlie Brown what women want: Real Estate.

      • dave says:

        “…Real Estate…”

        Free and clear, of course; with a trust fund for the up-keep.

        Oh, and and with an annex for mother.

  14. Crakar24 says:

    This is settled science in action, this dullard does not need to understand the science because Dr Roy is obviously wrong.

    The intent of the email was to abuse not convince………welcome to the big leagues Roy



  15. Hmmm amazed he didn’t go straight on into full-scale “Bigoilophobia” which we have discovered is a thing. He is exhibiting early symptoms of convulsive flurry. Get help.

  16. As a man, I’m a little insulted that the email writer has been assumed by everyone to be male. Females can be idiots, too. Just sayin’

  17. ossqss says:

    Paul Beckwith never stuck his foot in his mouth before did he?

    Oh wait!

    Does this recent event not fall in line with the recent push for skipping the peer review process on releasing papers?

    I believe there is a deep fear the alarmist’s efforts will be Trumped in the next election. Rightly so,,,, 😉

  18. Michael van der Riet says:

    Thanks for starting off my browsing experience with a good laugh. Mostly it’s been doom and gloom lately. George Mikes (of How to be an Alien fame) had the perfect comeback: “I repudiate your petulant expostulations.”

  19. Glenn says:

    It seems he is a charlatan. Quite a few of those around, and yes, they have been around for a very long time. Used to sell magic elixirs, now they sell fear.

  20. Mike M. says:

    The sad thing is that the emailer almost certainly thinks that his opinions are fact based and that he is pro science.

  21. Celeste says:

    I detect a major case of Groupthink by this guy. Essentially, he’s saying ‘join us or you’re going to be sorry’. It’s a post high school ticket to the in-crowd. Not everyone gets a chance like this. Think!

  22. David L. Hagen says:

    If he wants to get away from Chernoble he can move south – oh wait – skin cancer from solar UV about doubles going from 45 to 25 deg latitude! better put on a hat to go south to “escape” the radiation!

  23. TA says:

    The email writer is a True Believer who sounds very frightened about the situation.

    We should figure the costs of psychiatric treatment into the mix when trying to determine the total costs the promoters of CAGW have imposed on humanity through their deceptions, and twisting of the truth.

    • mpainter says:

      Good point. Society has been damaged. The reparations need to be inclusive. The enablers are liable with the principle of punitive damages having full force.

    • George Applegate says:

      Michael Crichton made a good point in talking about the casualties of Chernobyl. Most of the harm was not the result of radiation but the result of bad information creating panic and anxiety in the public.

  24. spalding craft says:

    Dr. Roy’s fan mail shows the depths to which the perpetrators of the climate wars has sunk. The truth of a statement is now secondary to its impact. If it gives someone an edge in the climate wars, even if just for a moment, anything is fair game.

    Paul Beckwith’s youtube post is a great example of this phenomenon. Social media’s ability to disseminate anything to an extent far greater than its intrinsic value is a source of empowerment, where some obscure self-appointed expert can have his/her moment in the buzz. Dr. Roy’s post ruins someone’s moment.

    This behavior of course is not limited to practitioners of any particular world view or to an occupant of any place along the climate wars’ spectrum, and threatens to ruin blogging as we know it.

    I hope Dr. Roy has the persistence to stay the course and can continue to debunk the trash that comes from all sides. He is well-qualified to do this and will not give lip-service to foolishness regardless of its origin.

    See Judy Curry’s post ( for additional discussion.

  25. JaneHM says:

    Any clues as to whether your “fan” may be someone we’re already familiar with? A Penn State IP address perhaps?

  26. Charles the moderator says:

    I recently had a conversation on the phone with a young woman which I will abbreviate here.

    Me: So it will be about two weeks?
    Her: Umm…not sure, they said about 14 days.

  27. Pierre says:

    I am sure this kind of idiocy is quite entertaining for a guy who came from Da Yoop.
    No doubt about it, there is a robust intellectual deficient emanating from the other side.

    Da Yoop is a reference to the USA, State of Michigan’s upper peninsula. A place where the mosquitos run the length of the bed to get airborne.

  28. Lewis says:

    Well I notice he didn’t physically threaten your life.

    What we all need to be aware of is where this is all going: From Barry Goldwaters speech accepting the Republican presidential nomination in 1964:

    Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.

  29. Hoi Polloi says:

    Sock puppet prof. Beckwith?

  30. Sunsettommy says:

    My comment still in moderation,maybe because it has two links in it?

  31. RAH says:

    Would this be the same Beckwith?

    “Why Arctic sea ice will vanish in 2013

    Submitted by Paul Beckwith on Mon, 2013-06-10 23:18”

    And if so perhaps those that defend him could tell us the truth about why?

  32. dave says:

    One of the most amusing failed predictions EVAH, was the prophecy concerning the overflow of the River Thames, which was to occur on the first day of February 1524, and wash away ten thousand houses in London*. All who could fled the city. The rest gathered on the banks to watch the bosom of the river begin to heave. It didn’t.

    It was proposed to drown the various mountebank fortune- tellers in the said river. However they succeeded in escaping their well deserved punishment by pleading that, only just now, they had discovered a very slight mathematical error in their astrological science, which meant that the inundation would actually occur on the first day of the month of February of the twenty-fourth year, of the NEXT century.

    *97% of experts in futurity agreed.

  33. Brett says:

    Hello Dr. Spencer,
    My name is Brett. I am a university student and found this website. I just want to know something if you have the time. As someone who believes firmly in science, I am a skeptic of everything. Teachers today seem to want to instill their own ideas in students. Many fall captive to what I call arrogance and tunnel-vision. I would love to just accept climate change as being man-made and be a part of the millions of college students who also believe this. But science, the field where questions are welcomed and challenges should be accepted, prevents me from accepting the single-mindedness which enslaves this very issue. Something is not right when I question something and I am told I am stupid, insane, and should “know better” as a science student.
    So, in this world of bias and lack of hard, untampered, misrepresented evidence, where can someone search for information? Where should I go to get another side? I will read your work to start. But how do you decide for yourself when so much information is only on one side? Where is the skepticism science should be about? And how do you deal with all the belittling you get?
    All I know is that it is refreshing to see a NASA scientist question and provide some evidence about another side.
    God bless you sir.
    -Brett Ransegnola
    Future student of Notre Dame

    • Tom Waeghe says:

      Wow, Brett. Good for you. A good scientist should always be critical and never accept what one person or another says without checking out all sides of an issue. You must test a hypothesis thoroughly and look for evidence of something NOT being true to attempt to prove to yourself and others whether it is true or not.

    • BigWaveDave says:


      Your comment is like a breath of fresh air.

      I get frustrated by the groupthink, and have more than once felt that nobody understands latent heat or mass anymore,

      The following is from my recent post at cfact to try to explain what seems to be missing.

      I typed this off the top of my head, so if I made some mistakes I’ll be glad to hear about them and get the opportunity to make corrections. My reasoning is similar to that of Abraham Oort in his article “The Energy Balance of the Earth” in Scientific American, September, 1970.

      The Sun heats much of the land and oceans to higher than average surface temperature (288 K) during the day, and heat is stored in water vapor as latent heat of evaporation and in water, regolith and rocks as sensible heat.

      Some of the stored heat is transported with mass in winds and currents to areas that receive less insolation, and some keeps the air warm at night.

      The amount of heat storage is affected by saturation temperature and surface temperature which are both dependent on pressure.

      Water’s latent heat of evaporation increases as saturation partial pressure and temperature decrease. At 288 K, latent heat of evaporation is about 2465 KJ/Kg. Relative to the specific heats of ice, liquid water, water vapor, dry air, regolith and rocks the latent heat of evaporation in water vapor is about 1170 X, 585 X, 1170 X, 2465 X and 2465 X the heat required to raise a unit mass of each, respectively by one K.

      Water vapor condensing at varied altitudes releases the latent heat, which warms the adjacent atmosphere, water or surface, or at the top of the troposphere, sends its heat toward space.

      Water vapor exiting the oceans also carries liquid water high into the atmosphere which intercepts and thermalizes some insolation before it ever reaches the surface, and stores this heat in the atmosphere.

      The expectation that the surface would be at a temperature closer to 255 K without CO2 treats the surface of the Earth as a black body with all heat of thermalized insolation immediately exiting by radiation, and ignores the reality of the thermal reservoir of heat stored in matter (some stationary, most mobile).

      CO2 has very little capacity to store heat. It has no identified property that could make it measurably significant to the energy

      • dave says:

        “The expectation that the surface would be at an [equivalent brightness] temperature closer to 255 K without CO2…”

        The expectation is that it would be at 255 K without CO2 AND WITHOUT water and water vapour. Of course, there would be a further point to make then, that a dry world would have no clouds and would reflect less sunlight, i.e. have a lower albedo – so the expectation is probably wrong.

  34. dave says:

    “You must test a[n] hypothesis thoroughly…”

    An experiment (or observation) can test “an hypothesis”; but a more sophisticated process is necessary in which you consciously calculate whether each of MULTIPLE hypotheses receives support or has doubt cast upon it, EACH TIME a seemingly isolated test of an hypothesis is being made. Field geologists are modern scientists who still employ multiple hypotheses – for what is under our feet is such a mess of hidden, casual, history.

    Wise people know that policemen sometimes ignore this rule, and that this can lead to miscarriages of justice. The police can display “tunnel vision” by assuming one person is guilty, whereupon they think it is their job to smash that person by all means possible – including ignoring contradictory physical evidence.

    The ability to see tele-connections between events is part of what is called life experience – or sometimes paranoia! It is subtle; and so there is a joke, which goes as follows: a group of old men are in a restaurant and one says “If I had only known what I know now, when I was eighteen…!” and the waitress overhears and says:

    “I’m eighteen. Tell me what you know!”

    • Russell says:

      Lets see. The word hypothesis set off a trigger in me. I am a pharmacist trained way back in the day. Science to me was always pretty much hard and fast. I could trust science.
      It was all based on math and KNOWN products . Science now is almost all conjecture. Voyager 1 entered the edge of our solar system and all the science needed to be reworked based on the facts sent back. Politics have financed and corrupted science into an entity I no longer put much faith in unless it is based on facts and concrete evidence. Dinosaurs were reptiles until they were maybe related to birds. And so it goes with dust storms on planets a billion light years away viewed by telescopes and computer imaging and somebody guessing as to what caused the storm. (BS) My point is not even Dr. Spencer has guessed correctly over a couple month climate event. Hypothesis is a nice word for a good guess.(But it ain’t worth sh*t.)

  35. Ned says:

    Reconstituted doomsday mythology.

    “Beyond the universal aspects of fear and our survival response to it, certain personality traits may make individuals more susceptible to believing it’s the end of the world.”

  36. dave says:

    Almost as universal, is the Tourettes-like compulsion to pass on warning signals – with embellishment.

  37. dave says:

    I just did it! Only, it was a warning against warnings!

Leave a Reply