Paul Burtwistle writes:
Last night I watched an item on Channel 9’s 60 minutes here in Australia which covered Dr Stefan Harrison of Exeter University in the UK and his work studying the Exploradores glacier in Patagonia, Argentina.
The story contained an alarmist view regarding the sudden increase in the rate at which the glacier is receding over the last 10-20 years. The documentary does explain that the glacier has retreated a lot over the last 20,000 years but that the rate of decrease is up to 50 times greater in the last 10-20 years that it was 500 years ago and this is all due to AGW (at 5 mins 26 seconds in to “Wild Patagonia part 2″).
At 5 minutes 40 seconds in to the item Dr Harrison asked about climate skeptics and he goes on to say that they are not worth debating their viewpoint as it’s “like mud wrestling with pigs. Firstly you get covered in mud and secondly, the pig loves it” he then goes on to say he won’t debate skeptics because geographers don’t debate with people who think the world is flat and biologists don’t debate with people who think evolution isn’t happening or that the world is only 6000 years old.
You can view the whole article here (2 x 8 minute items) – http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/stories/8834229/wild-patagonia-the-glaciers-that-hold-a-dire-warning-for-earths-future .
The two articles are Wild Patagonia 1 & 2. I think some attention should be drawn to this appalling piece and I’ve already written to Channel 9 to voice my disapproval.
==========================================================
Huh, I don’t know of ANY climate skeptic who thinks the world is flat or that the Earth is only 6000 years old. I wonder where he gets his information…The Daily Kos perhaps?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Dr Stephan Harrison does not debate with sceptics because he is a coward. Better to throw insults at people from afar than to engage in dialogue like an adult..
Any debate would allow the public to see how incompetent Stephan Harrison was.
Bang goes the grant money!
Its a pathetic attempt to delegitimise criticism. They hope if they pretend the problems with their theories don’t exist, that nobody will notice them.
Pigs and sceptics have one thing in common, yes.
In both cases any fight would end with him being eaten alive.
you said “Huh, I don’t know of ANY climate skeptic who thinks the world is flat or that the Earth is only 6000 years old. I wonder where he gets his information…The Daily Kos perhaps?”
Err
He means that geographers don’t debate with people who believe the world is flat, so why should climate scientists debate with people who deny … (whatever he thinks sceptics are denying)
When your worldview collapses under the weight of its own mendacity, you can either acknowledge your mistake and start anew or head for a bunker of denial and toss stones.
Dr Stephan Harrison has apparently opted for stone throwing…and credibility extinction.
He was equating sceptics with flat-earthers, not necessarily saying that one is the same as the other. Still, the man holds an incredibly ignorant and anti-scientific position if that’s how he thinks. I wonder if he now accepts the theory of continental drift (the theory that was ridiculed for decades before its acceptance)? He probably does, but only because there is now a consensus, nothing to do with evidence. That’s how these cretins think.
Debating with Warmists is like arguing with a post!
He even looks dishonest.
Oh really, Dr. Harrison? It might help if you had sensible answers to any observation that does not conform to your preconceived conclusions.
Meanwhile, poleward South from Patagonia. Antarctic sea ice anomaly is >1.4 Million Km2 above 30 yr. avg.
I have also expressed my disgust to Chanel 9 at this appalling grant seeker.
I might have seen the onerous Dr Harrison.
In Johns Street.
Drinking in the Fat Pig.
[Harrison] then goes on to say he won’t debate skeptics because geographers don’t debate with people who think the world is flat and biologists don’t debate with people who think evolution isn’t happening or that the world is only 6000 years old.
Seems reasonable.
Stephan.Harrison@exeter.ac.uk
Go easy on him, he’s a bit, uh…odd:
“Dr Harrison also has research interests in the philosophy of physical geography. He has written on the ontology of quantum theory as an argument against realist philosophy in geography, and argued for the identification of emergent properties in landscapes as an alternative to the reductionist model-building paradigm.”
Typical level of intellectual arrogance I’d expect from a leftie.
If he had science and facts on his side then debating CAGW would be no different than responding to questions from a Child. A geographer would have no trouble responding to the questions of a Child of why the Earth is round and not flat. The problem for Mr. Harrison is that the science and facts do not back up his beliefs that’s why he is afraid to debate CAGW.
To back up Alan Robertson:
… and don’t let the alarmists argue that the increase in sea ice is due to more ice sheet melt water. All ice sheets melt, in Antarctica it melts from below (geothermal heat), not from above, and also loses ice via ice streams (streams of ice, not streams of melt water in ice). Snowfall replaces the lost ice.
Warmists have been having a free lunch with polar ice for too long.
I would very much like to meet a person who thinks the world is under 10000 years old. I have been looking for about 10 years.
If you have to fabricate a ridiculous position supposedly held by skeptics you are admitting defeat.
And why do so many climate scientists always seem to bubble with anger? How would anyone trust this person to do good science, rather than yet more confirmation bias.
Mud wrestle with pigs–he must have been looking in the mirror.
If you read his research page you’ll see most pertains to climate change. I guess his livelihood depends on climate change – another trougher!
Stefan (self opinionated, dickless klutz) Harrison, doesn’t want to debate his religious beliefs eh?
I sent an email to a friend today. Here is part of the text.
“The first link gives a list of dates covering human prehistory from 150,000 thousand years ago to 5.500 years ago or 3,600 BC to 3,500 BC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_prehistory
All such dates are approximate and based on research in the fields of anthropology, archaeology, genetics, geology, and linguistics. They are all subject to revision based on new discoveries or analyses, unlike so-called climate science, about which, warmists will tell you, the science is settled. If ongoing research into human history is any guide, no science is ever settled, is it?”
Harrison is a liar of the worst kind; he lies to himself & his connections. That’s self abuse, but hey, it couldn’t happen to a more deserving toerag.
Harrison is the one with the snout. And it is well and truly in the trough…
Let’s not descend to his level with irrelevant name-calling. Apart from being juvenile it will only make the uncommitted think that we are just as bad as the more vicious warmist zealots and distract from useful arguments.
Did anyone (else apart from me) follow or do the online climate Change course that Exeter held recently?
I always thought Exeter was part of the UK or even on Planet Earth, the uni isn’t.
Several examples..
In discussing really ancient climate (and snowball Earth esp), apparently the original snowball Earth was caused by “growing continents” and the resultant weathering of all this new rock sucked all the CO2 out of the atmosphere, albedo kicked in, caused the cooling and froze the whole planet. That is where all the present limestone we see around us came from.
Excuse me professor, which continent did all the growing and where is it now?
Then we were informed, Earth was released from its snowball state by massive volcanoes that pumped a load of CO2 back into the air and warmed it all up again.
Q. Where were all these volcanoes?
Then up jumped some lady biologist who liked putting critters she’d found in rock-pools into hubbly bubbly plastic bottles, poking said critters with a pencil and declared that they’d dissolve with all this CO2 we’re emitting. No mention that very similar critters using similar chemistry existed under 8000+ ppmv of CO2 and made all the limestone the previous guy was on about. The words ‘buffer solution’ were simply not in her vocabulary.
Chief climate professor then reappears to inform us the Arctic is melting because of decreased albedo, said decrease being caused by the melting. IOW, the Arctic is melting because it is melting. When, on the message board I mentioned the antics of Christmas Turkey down in the Antarctic just very recently, i didn’t get a reply but the end-of-week video informed us the all the Antarctic ice was caused by the wind blowing it around. Obviously no mention of where the ice actually came from nor that wind may have had any impact on Arctic ice.
In another section, covering mitigation/adaptation, the good professor informed us that there are sufficient people on board Planet Earth and that a good few of them should start wearing condoms a bit more often. In the very next section on that course, the very next thing you click on following that lecture, said professor delivered his talk while leaning on a push-bike. Not any old push-bike, a push-bike with a child’s seat attached behind the rider’s seat.
There are not the words………