Roy Spencer is skeptical about the more extreme climate predictions that arise from the computer models.

If you read his work, you'll find out that he is a climate "luke-warmer" (like me): he believes that the global climate is gradually warming, but it's not yet clear how much of a part we humans actually play, or that the observed warming is detrimental.

Spencer is responsible for making actual satellite temperature measurements:

Before becoming a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in 2001, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, where he and Dr. John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites. Dr. Spencer’s work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite.

"Climate Change" has been the new term for "Global Warming" for some time now. It is used because it's more flexible - most any change can be reported in an alarmist way. If you want to discuss the greening of the Sahara, that's local climate change. If you want to discuss the global warming of the troposphere, possibly due to increased global levels of CO2, that's "Global Warming", but "Lets call that Climate Change now". All the international concern and science activity is about the latter, not local climate change.

I'm pointing out that the Global Warming forecasts are based on a large number of computer models, not on measurements of actual global reality. You'll notice that the IPCC is gradually abandoning its most extreme models, since their predictions have not actually occurred. It appears that the computer models and reality will converge at around a 1.3C per century increase, starting from 1980.