Oh, sorry, the 2nd article was from Think Progress, that's a good point. HOWEVER, bunk science is bunk and I will call out charlatans like the Creation Science Institute every time. There's a difference between a real scientist with an unpopular opinion a fool with a piece of toilet paper from a diploma mill.
the think progress article linked to three other scientists who all rebutted Spencer's work. This is a good, non-political, rebuttal written by a few climate scientists:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/07/misdiagnosis-of-surface-temperature-feedback/In all fairness, to avoid making this a political discussion I should have linked to the actual scientists instead of thinkprogress, I was just being lazy.
