Global Warming is a Scam

Which is completely consistent with the science showing we are experiencing global climate change.

And what is this agenda? Please provide some sort of evidence for this assertion?
Is there a conspiracy? If so why? Who is leading it?

Except for some billions of people. By what reasoning do you reach this conclusion.

Animals need oxygen to live so if oxygen in atmosphere increased animals would do even better?Do you realize that not all plant life is beneficial for human existence? DO you not think agriculture will be affected drastically? More carbon dioxide is not going to mean better crop yields. You might want to take a class on botany while your at it. Plants need much more than CO2 to thrive. Climate myths: Higher CO2 levels will boost plant growth and food production You really need to look into things before you open your mouth.

Are you really that simple?First of all I did not say die, so quit misrepresenting what I say. Billions will not thrive.Ocean levels rise, billions displaced. Agriculture will be fundamentally changed. Where something grew well before it might not in future. Do you know anything about wheat? Rapeseed? Corn? How about trees?. You really dont have much more than simple thoughts do you. No more CO2 does not mean more plants and if it does more plants does not mean more food.Read about the subject.

Lindzen

quote:

---

Lindzen first published this "iris" theory in 2001, and offered more support in a 2009 paper, but today "most mainstream researchers consider Dr. Lindzen’s theory discredited." Dr. Lindzen acknowledged that the 2009 paper contained some stupid mistakes in his handling of the satellite data. It was just embarrassing, he said in an interview. The technical details of satellite measurements are really sort of grotesque. .

---

Source
Lindzen Illusions
Misrepresentation from LindzenAs for Spencer his claims have all been debunked.. He is an IDer that is letting his religious views affect his science. An easy web search will show counters by many scientists against his views. Try reading a few. You are not being scientific. You have come to a conclusion and are looking for evidence to support it.Read both sides with an open mind. Look at the science not the spin.Spencer is a crank that has been shown to be wrong by numerous people. His conclusions do not stand up to the evidence.Edited by Theodoric, : wrong name on last paragraph

You made some outrageous claims inMessage 128 that I questioned in Message 133Please address this with some sort of evidence. You merely claiming this does not suffice.
Or do you not have any evidence but again just something you are parroting?