Hello, Ive made a number of small changes to this and Id like to record why. As a director of the George C. Marshall Institute, Spencer is no ordinary sceptic. He is teaching ignorance instead of advancing science, and he manages to retain some credibility by publishing his satellite heat data work, which I believe is uncontroversial.
He also has shifted his position on the science of AGW numerous times. A proper study of this needs to be done, to undermine his credibility.
I have been very direct today in saying that Spencer lies on his blog about his funding. I stand by that. I don't know whether his work for George C. Marshall is pro bono (I suspect it is not) but the link between the oil money and the George C. Marshall is plenty to say the man has big oil sponsorship. He cannot be unaware of that link, so his claim cannot be excused as merely untrue. If needs be I will email Spencer to put it to him that he is lying . 25/07/2010
Dear Hengistmcstone: I have added some additional information about GMI, but I have not seen any links to information that he receives any financial compensation from GMI as a board member and so I have deleted that reference. Have you checked GMI's 990 tax filings or do you have another source for this proposition? Thank you for your diligent pursuit of information about this climate "skeptic." Lisa
GMIs 990 Tax filings for 2008 are here http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/222/222569466/222569466_200812_990.pdf
Well, I have to concede you're right , but only just. Turns out he gets no payment from GMI and only works there an hour a week(page 7). I will continue this enquiry though and add one or two things to GMIs SW Hengist
Dear Hengistmcstone: Thank you for following up on that! Much appreciated!! Lisa