Climate Denial Crock of the Week - How to Pick a Cherry

Support Climate Denial Crock of the Week, go to
http://www.climatecrocks.com

Harrison Schmitt is a right wing activist whose history as an Apollo astronaut makes him an ideal tool for the climate denier industry‬

Let's examine a recent claim that Dr Schmitt has made about arctic sea ice.


more here:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/02/07/exposing-new-mexico...
http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/27/denier-harrison-schmitt-holdren-communi...
http://www.koat.com/news/26645379/detail.html
http://profmandia.wordpress.com/2011/02/07/nm-energy-secretary-harrison-schmi...
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Articgate-perpetuating-myth-Arctic-sea-ice-re...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/misrepresenting-climate-s_b_8193...
http://www.desmogblog.com/criticism-intensifies-new-mexico's-climate-deny...
http://www.grinzo.com/energy/?p=2351
http://climateprogress.org/2011/02/07/harrison-schmitt-climate-science-denier...

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Climate change
• climate
• global warming
• CO2
• carbon dioxide
• climate science
• banned video
• Peter Sinclair
• greenland
• ice cores
• harrison schmitt
• Crock
• Denial
• Denier
• Climate Denier
• Climate Denial
• green
• earth
• environment
• atmosphere
• cherry picking
• climate denial crock

[thesparitan]

And vmggie, even tex, who is one of the more extreme deniers I have ever talked to, thinks you are a wackjob. I understand why he thinks you are trolling for our side.

[greenman3610]

@thesparitan

there are some levels of crazy that you just can't fake.

[vmgqie]

you are so full of shit you prick the astronaut was correct

[greenman3610]

@vmgqie

I love your posts because they say so much more than I could about who you are.

[thesparitan]

@Texmurphy51 Its not misdirection, you made a stupid argument. What recent report from nasa and anglia are you talking about?

[Texmurphy51]

@thesparitan sez"This quote of yours is completely irrelevant "

No it is Not, when you make a statement you say WE KNOW, like your part of the Scientific community doing the study.

Your only reporting what others say, you cant say WE KNOW.

This is just an attempt to make what you claim be default as truth.

This again is an attempt to get off subject as to the most recent report from Anglia & NASA.

Typical misdirection while someone conjures an explanation for the data

[thesparitan]

@Texmurphy51 "ARE YOU A SCIENTIST, involved with the GW subject?"

This illustrates my point.  This quote of yours is completely irrelevant and the fact you keep on doing it is why no debate..

[Texmurphy51]

@thesparitan sez"last time we talked you completely avoided almost ever point I brought up"

Thats BS unless your the one that posted 4 to 5 return comments.

I address every point in my return posts to everyone.

You dont need to teach me anything, as I said,

ARE YOU A SCIENTIST, involved with the GW subject?

AGAIN I am NOT asking you to debate me.

Just address the statements recently made by the groups you used as references.

No GW since 1997, address that, or run away.

[thesparitan]

@Texmurphy51 Project much lol, last time we talked you completely avoided almost ever point I brought up. Like I said, you are far to uninformed to actually debate. I have to teach you not only science but fallacies and argumentation before we ever start talking about global warming and besides you dodge most of the questions I asked anyways. I don't see any point in debating you. Its a waste of my time.

[Texmurphy51]

@thesparitan sez"The reason I am not addressing some of the points you bring up "

I am reporting the NEWS, not my personal opinions.

I am asking you to comment on what those you have used in the past as agents of the truth.

NASA & East Anglia.

You & Greenman seem to be going every direction to avoid addressing the admission & on the data put out by these people.

Your down to finding reasons not to address me.

Address the Science here not me.

I can tell your Beliefs are shaken

[thesparitan]

Tex, again even if it were true that there has been no warming since 1997, that wouldn't prove your point. You just don't know what you are talking about, at all.  I can't have a debate with you.

[thesparitan]

@Texmurphy51 The reason I am not addressing some of the points you bring up is because after our last exchange you've shown that you can't handle rational argumentation. I have tried already.