Watch Now: Morano V. Bill Nye Climate Debate on Fox With Stossel – Nye Cites ‘Hockey Stick’ as Proof – Says Politicians can fix potholes & the climate – Morano denounces as ‘medieval witchcraft’ – Full Transcript


By: - Climate DepotJanuary 28, 2014 1:21 PM with 13 comments

Stossel’s ‘Chill Out’ program with John Stossel on Fox Business – First Broadcast January 23, 2014Bill Nye the Science Guy, who says he is “frantic” about climate change debates skeptic Marc Morano of ClimateDepot.com. (Note: Morano and Nye also debated on CNN in 2012. Also see Morano debating on UN TV in Nov. and his debate on CNN in Dec. 2013 as well as his January 2014 Fox News appearance on cold and AGW)

Watch Full Nye Debate Below: 

Full Transcript Below – But first, selected enhanced transcripts with weblink references.

#

Bill Nye on how politicians can fix potholes, time red lights and fix the climate: 

STOSSEL: This idea that politicians can fix the climate strikes me as arrogance. And I think we heard arrogance six years ago from our president after he defeated Hillary Clinton.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STOSSEL: Bill, isn’t this the conceit of the self-anointed, politicians are going to fix the climate?

NYE: By way of example, is it conceit when politicians claim they’re going to fix potholes in the street?

STOSSEL: No, they can do that.

NYE: It is conceit when politicians say they’re going to time the traffic lights?

STOSSEL: No, they can do that.

MORANO: No, they can do that.

NYE: Is it conceit when politicians — is it conceit when politicians say they’re going to clean up the water in Chesapeake Bay?

STOSSEL: Nope.

NYE: Is that inappropriate? Those — those things have been done.

STOSSEL: Right.

MORANO: Those are doable.

NYE: This is the same thing on a much, much larger scale.

#

Nye fails to recognize 1990 UN IPCC temperature graph showing medieval warm period as warmer than today:

STOSSEL: And if you look, over time, we have a graph here from just the year 1000 to today, we had the Medieval warm period, we had the Little Ice Age, big changes.

NYE: You’ve really, uh, you’ve really messed with the far right hand side of the graph.

MORANO: That’s the United Nations graph from 1990, pre-hockey stick

NYE: Yes.

MORANO: – before they reinvented past temperatures.

#

Morano vs. Nye on Development in Africa, Asia, & South America

MORANO: I interviewed Jerry Brown, who said that they couldn’t emulate American lifestyle. Well, who is he? How is the white, wealthy Western Europe world, in Europe and the United States, going to tell people of color, 1.3 billion in the developing world, they can’t have what we have? Who is Bill Nye to tell [the developing word] they can’t have carbon-based energy?’

NYE: ‘We don’t want to have less. We want to do more with less. And this is where the innovations come in.’

#

Morano on politicized science and growing number of skeptical scientists:

save image

MORANO: ‘The head of UN IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, just came out last year or the year before and said their mission is to make the case that CO2 is driving global warming. They put the cart before the horse. And what happened was many U.N. scientists have now turned on it. Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish scientist, has just come out and said we wouldn’t even have noticed the warming of the 20th century if it weren’t for modern instrumentation. And the idea of the hockey stick that Bill Nye mentioned is absurd. That has been called, quote, “statistical rubbish,” unquote. And hundreds of scientists in dozens and dozens of studies have shown both the Medieval and the Roman warming period. And these appeared in peer-reviewed journals, were as warm or warmer than current temperatures.

Skeptical scientists’ numbers have grown. We’ve had scientists like James Lovelock, who — the inventor of the Gaia Earth Theory, who’s reversed himself. It comes down to hundreds of factors are influencing our climate here. CO2 is not the tail that wagged the dog. Another scientist who has essentially reversed herself is Judith Curry from Georgia Institute of Technology. She now says openly that you cannot control climate by reducing emissions. And that seems to be the entire premise of the United Nations, that somehow, if we tweak emissions through carbon taxes, cap and trade, we can alter weather patterns. You opened up with tornadoes and Barbara Boxer. She actually went down to the Senate floor the day of tornadoes and implied a carbon tax would help prevent future tornado outbreaks. This is Medieval witchcraft.

#

Nye smears skeptical scientists as akin to tobacco industry:

NYE: ‘This is perfectly analogous to the cigarette industry and cancer, trying to introduce the idea that since you can’t prove any one thing, the whole thing is in — is in doubt.’

MORANO: ‘For Nye to bring up cigarettes – it’s the global warming scientists who are the ones fulfilling a narrative. I mean we have Michael Oppenheimer, one of the lead U.N. scientists, took an endowment from Barbra Streisand. Hollywood – he’s the climatologists to the stars. It’s so insulting to imply that somehow skeptical scientists are on the pay like tobacco companies. It’s the height of arrogance when you look at the actual data, the global warming scientists, through government grants, foundations, through media empowerment, have the full advantages of government money, foundation money, university money. There’s not even any comparison.’ [Related Links: Michael Mann lawyers up with Tobacco Lawyers! Represented by experienced defamation lawyer John B. Williams who successfully represented R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company - Mann’s lawyer ‘successfully defended R.J. Reynolds in commercial speech case filed by FTC challenging cartoon character, Joe Camel’ & Flashback: Warmists’ mimic tobacco industry tactics: ‘Like tobacco industry, Warmists’ manufactured uncertainty & fear by stridently proclaiming certainty & consensus based on dubious & uncertain modeled results predicting disastrous consequences of a warmer climate’]

STOSSEL: As a consumer reporter, I’ve covered 1,000 scares. Lawn chemicals, cell phone radiation, pesticide residues, plastic bottles killing people, power lines, Mad Cow Disease was going to kill everybody. And always the example is, yes, there were doubters about cigarettes. I mean that one example doesn’t mean that the global warming scare is correct.’

#

Overpopulation Debate

NYE: In the year 1750, there were about a billion humans in the world. Now, there are well over seven — seven billion people in the world. It more than doubled in my lifetime. So all these people trying to live the way we live in the developed world is filling the atmosphere with a great deal more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases than existed a couple of centuries ago.

Morano: ‘Bill keeps going on about overpopulation. The problem is, is that people now recognizing one of the biggest problems is under population. As the developing world gets more and more carbon-based energy, India and Africa, and starts developing, the population is going to level off. So the hysteria has been there. You can go back…

NYE: So we disagree about the facts, Mr. Morano.

MORANO: You can’t disagree about facts.

NYE: The problem…

(LAUGHTER)

NYE: — and the problem is not just that there are more people in India and China, it’s they are using more energy than they ever used to use.

MORANO: And God bless them. They need that.

#

Full Transcript below: 

 

Stossel

 

January 23, 2014 Thursday

 

SHOW: STOSSEL 9:00 PM EST

 

Chill Out

 

BYLINE: John Stossel

 

GUESTS: Phil Valentine, Alex Epstein, Marc Morano, Bill Nye, Robert Engelman, Bill Bissett, Mark Nelson

 

SECTION: NEWS; Financial

 

LENGTH: 7553  words

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is not just cold, this is a killer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If this isn’t climate change, then what is it?

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: As an American, I am here to say we need to act.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(APPLAUSE)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN STOSSEL, HOST (voice-over): All dramatic weather is our fault.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, my god.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Terrible tornadoes in Oklahoma. Horrible.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know that this is because of the burning of fossil fuels.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Carbon could cost us the planet.

STOSSEL: It makes me want to ask Al Gore about that, but where is he?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He’s out at one of his other houses.

STOSSEL: Whether Gore is right about global warming didn’t matter, you already pay for his remedy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, they’re declaring war, truly, on jobs.

STOSSEL: Who will win this war?

UNIDENTIFIED CHILDREN: It’s a happy ending.

STOSSEL: We’ll search for that. That’s our show tonight.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

ANNOUNCER: And now, John Stossel.

STOSSEL: I titled this program, “Chill out,” because after I researched the global warming scare that was my conclusion. We ought to just chill out. But our government isn’t chilling out. You now pay billions to try to fix global warming. And this year, “The Hill,” the Washington newspaper that covers Congress, said climate will be the political battle of 2014. Big money is being spent to convince Americans to vote to spend even more to try to stop global warming. In a moment, we’ll hear from Bill Nye, “The Science Guy,” who says he’s frantic about climate change. He’ll debate Marc Morano of climatedepot.com. But first, let me set the terms of debate. People say to me, Stossel, you don’t believe in global warming? But I do. I think it’s a stupid question, because what do you mean when you say global warming? To me, it’s really four questions.

One, is the globe warming? Well, yes. Global temperatures have risen, though not lately so much. Question two, is the warming manmade, is it our fault? Three, is it a crisis?

And four, if it is, can we do anything about it? Bill Nye’s answers to those questions are yes, yes, yes and yes. And for years, he’s told his viewers, beware of…

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL NYE, “THE SCIENCE GUY”: — what we call global warming. Global warming.

The globe is getting too warm. It’s something we’ve got to be careful of. Otherwise, things could get weird.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STOSSEL: Bill Nye joins us now, along with climate change skeptic, Marc Morano. Marc, you first. Why aren’t you scared? Bill and lots of people are.

MARC MORANO, FOUNDER, CLIMATE DEPOT: We’re now able to empirically look at their predictions that they made in the ’80s and start to see them fail. And out of 117 climate models, one analysis showed 114 failed. So when the predictions are failing them, uh, they still claim it’s worse than they thought. But that’s not the case here. So the bottom line is, the burden of proof is on them and they’ve failed to make the case.

STOSSEL: Bill Nye?

NYE: In the year 1750, there were about a billion humans in the world. Now, there are well over seven — seven billion people in the world. It more than doubled in my lifetime. So all these people trying to live the way we live in the developed world is filling the atmosphere with a great deal more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases than existed a couple of centuries ago. It’s the speed at which it is changing that is going to be troublesome for so many, uh, large populations of humans around the world. Now, you may have heard of the hockey stick graph. This is where, uh, we compare the temperature of the world over the last 10,000 years with the temperature now. And so we think of that, uh, as the…

save image

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: — of a hockey stick?

NYE: — shaft of a hockey stick…

STOSSEL: — it’s going to shoot up.

NYE: Well, it is shooting up. It’s not going to, it is shooting up. And so it’s the speed that we’re going to have difficulty dealing with. But economically…

STOSSEL: But the temperature hasn’t increased in the past 15 years. It isn’t shooting up.

NYE: When you cherry-pick the data for certain surface temperatures, you end up with a — a very small change. It’s hardly noticeable. These people try to introduce the idea that scientific uncertainty, plus or minus a few percent, is equivalent to doubt about the whole thing. This is perfectly analogous to the cigarette industry and cancer, trying to introduce the idea that since you can’t…

(CROSSTALK)

NYE: — prove any one thing, the whole thing is in — is in doubt.

(CROSSTALK)

STOSSEL: As a consumer reporter. Just hang on one second, Marc. I’ll give you a shot. As a consumer reporter, I’ve covered 1,000 scares. Lawn chemicals, cell phone radiation…

MORANO: Sure.

STOSSEL: Pesticide residues, plastic bottles killing people, power lines, Mad Cow Disease was going to kill everybody. And always the example is, yes, there were doubters about cigarettes. I mean that one example doesn’t mean that the global warming scare is correct.

But, Marc, I — I should let you speak.

MORANO: Yes. For him to bring up cigarettes — the global warming scientists are the ones fulfilling a narrative. I mean we have Michael Oppenheimer, one of the lead U.N. scientists, took an endowment from Barbra Streisand. These Hollywood — the climatologists to the stars.

STOSSEL: Well, they’ve got to…

MORANO: He’s also…

STOSSEL: — get money from…

(CROSSTALK)

STOSSEL: — Barbra Streisand wants to give me money, I’ll take it.

MORANO: Right. But it’s so insulting to imply that somehow skeptical scientists are on the pay like tobacco companies. It’s the height of arrogance when you look at the actual data, the global warming scientists, through government grants, foundations, through media empowerment, have the full advantages of government money, foundation money, university money. There’s not even any comparison. And yet, these skeptical scientists, as their numbers have grown, we’ve had scientists like James Lovelock, who — the inventor of the Gaia Earth Theory, who has reversed himself.

STOSSEL: But a lot of climate scientists, serious ones, are genuinely worried.

MORANO: The ones you’ll always point to these ‘genuine’ climate scientists are from the United Nations. And the United Nations, the head of it, Rajendra Pachauri, came out last year or the year before and said their mission is to make the case that CO2 is driving global warming. They put the cart before the horse. And what happened was many U.N. scientists have now turned on it. Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish scientist, has just come out and said we wouldn’t even have noticed the warming of the 20th century if it weren’t for modern instrumentation. And the idea of the hockey stick that Bill Nye mentioned is absurd. That has been, you know, called, quote, “statistical rubbish,” unquote. And hundreds of scientists in dozens and dozens of studies have shown both the Medieval and the Roman warming period. And these appeared in peer-reviewed journals, were as warm or warmer than current temperatures.

STOSSEL: Bill?

NYE: See if we can agree about this. There used to be a billion people a couple of centuries ago. Now there are seven billion.

STOSSEL: We agree on that.

NYE: There used to be…

STOSSEL: And the air is cleaner and people are living better.

MORANO: Yes.

STOSSEL: And fewer people are starving because of capitalism and industrialization.

NYE: Do we agree that the atmosphere used to have 250 parts per million, now it has over 400 of carbon dioxide.

STOSSEL: Yes. There’s more greenhouse gas out there.

MORANO: Absolutely. We’ve had ice ages at between 2,000 and 8,000 parts per million in the geological history of the Earth. We’ve had similar temperatures with 20 times the CO2 levels.

STOSSEL: Climate does change.

MORANO: Sure.

STOSSEL: And if you look, over time, we have a graph here from just the year 1000 to today, we had the Medieval warm period, we had the Little Ice Age, big changes.

NYE: You’ve really, uh, you’ve really messed with the far right hand side of the graph.

MORANO: That’s the United Nations graph from 1990, pre-hockey stick…

NYE: Yes.

MORANO: — before they reinvented past temperatures.

NYE: Do you agree that it’s never happened this fast?

MORANO: Actually, we’ve had, without benefit of mankind, similar CO2 levels in the recent (geologic) past without mankind’s influence. And I think…

(CROSSTALK)

MORANO: — the speed had nothing to do with it.

NYE: What about the weight?

MORANO: It comes down to hundreds of factors are influencing our climate here. CO2 is not the tail that wagged the dog. Another scientist who has essentially reversed herself is Judith Curry from Georgia Institute of Technology. She now says openly that you cannot control climate by reducing emissions. And that seems to be the entire premise of the United Nations, that somehow, if we tweak emissions through carbon taxes, cap and trade, we can alter weather patterns. You opened up with tornadoes and Barbara Boxer. She actually went down to the Senate floor the day of tornadoes and implied a carbon tax would help prevent future tornado outbreaks. This is Medieval witchcraft.

STOSSEL: It seems like every time there’s a new weather extreme, some people say the cause was manmade global warming.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tomorrow morning, 90 percent of the country will face below normal temperatures. If this isn’t climate change, then what is it?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know that this is because of the burning of fossil fuels.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In one year, we have had the largest tornado ever recorded on Earth. And we have had the fastest hurricane ever recorded on Earth. And they’ve hit within six months of each other.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Terrible tornadoes in Oklahoma, horrible. Carbon could cost us the planet.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STOSSEL: That was Senator Barbara Boxer the day of — the very day of the Oklahoma tornado. So, Bill, global warming is going to cost us the planet, causing these tornadoes?

NYE: Well, you see, the planet will be here — well, the planet will be here, but if we have to…

STOSSEL: We won’t?

NYE: — continually rebuild and displace people.

MORANO: The idea that the United States or developing world should limit their energy choices based on rising CO2 fears is scientifically baseless, as I just mentioned. And the geologic record bears that out and the current weather bears it out. There’s no more weather extremes over the 20th century. You can go from hurricanes or — we’re at a historic low right now…

STOSSEL: The Oklahoma tor — tornado was the biggest ever.

MORANO: And they have better monitoring. We had the lowest year on record for tornadoes. And since the 1950s…

STOSSEL: There were fewer tornadoes.

STOSSEL: I’m struck, researching this, how — how there’s constant media hysteria. And it changes. In 1941, it was reported…

MORANO: Yes.

STOSSEL: — that World War II caused weather extremes. In 1961, “The New York Times” said scientists agree the world’s becoming colder. Scientists worried about a new ice age. Now we worry about warming.

Shouldn’t we be skeptical?

MORANO: Yes, and I’m sure people would say, well — science has advanced so much more. Well, science is always going to advance. The point is, this is the narrative of our day. And Bill keeps going on about overpopulation. The problem is, is that people now recognize one of the biggest problems is under population. As the developing world gets more and more carbon-based energy, India and Africa, and starts developing, the population is going to level off. So the hysteria has been there. You can go back…

NYE: So we disagree about the facts, Mr. Morano.

MORANO: You can’t disagree about facts. You’re…

NYE: The problem…

(LAUGHTER)

NYE: — and the problem is not just that there are more people in India and China, it’s they are using more energy than they ever used to use.

MORANO: And God bless them. They need that.

NYE: They want to live the way we live in the de…

STOSSEL: Why is that a problem?

NYE: They want to live the way we…

STOSSEL: That’s a good thing…

NYE: — live in the developed world.

MORANO: Would you deny them that?

NYE: So…

MORANO: I interviewed Jerry Brown, who said that they couldn’t emulate American lifestyle. Well, who is he — how is the white, wealthy Western Europe world, in Europe and the United States, going to tell people of color, 1.3 billion in the developing world, they can’t have what we have? Who is Bill Nye to tell them they can’t have carbon-based energy, which we…

STOSSEL: Well, let Bill Nye…

MORANO: — took full advantage of.

STOSSEL: — answer that.

NYE: We don’t want to have less. We want to do more with less. And this is where the innovations come in.

MORANO: Sure.

NYE: This is where the emerging technologies come in.

But embracing, uh, technologies that produce extra carbon dioxide, extra greenhouse gases, at this point in human history, is not in our best interests.

STOSSEL: I just want to play one more…

NYE: So…

STOSSEL: — video example to end. This idea that politicians can fix the climate strikes me as arrogance. And I think we heard arrogance six years ago from our president after he defeated Hillary Clinton.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STOSSEL: Bill, isn’t this the conceit of the self-anointed, politicians are going to fix the climate?

NYE: By way of example, is it conceit when politicians claim they’re going to fix potholes in the street?

STOSSEL: No, they can do that.

NYE: It is conceit when politicians say they’re going to time the traffic lights?

STOSSEL: No, they can do that.

MORANO: No, they can do that.

NYE: Is it conceit when politicians — is it conceit when politicians say they’re going to clean up the water in Chesapeake Bay?

STOSSEL: Nope.

NYE: Is that inappropriate?

Those — those things have been done.

STOSSEL: Right.

MORANO: Those are doable.

NYE: This is the same thing on a much, much larger scale.

STOSSEL: Thank you, Bill Nye and Marc Morano.

NYE: Thank you.

STOSSEL: To keep this conversation going on Facebook or Twitter, if you use that hash tag chillout, you can let me and others know what you think.

#

Related Links: 

Early Reactions from viewers of the Morano/Nye Debate on Stossel TV: ‘Utterly Stunned watching Climate Depot’s [Morano] debate UNARMED opponent’ Nye 

‘Utterly Stunned watching Climate Depot debate UNARMED opponent TheScienceGuy (Nye) on @FBN Stossel Nye only repeated superficial talking points’ 

Nye ‘is just uninformed & frankly embarrassing repeating [Paul] Ehrlich population ‘bomb’ meme’ 

‘My take from Stossel last night was that Bill Nye was more worried about population than CO2.  Denying emerging nations cheap energy well lead to disease and starvation. Which is eerily similar to John Holdren’s solutions’ 

Related Links from December 2012 Debate Between Morano & Nye:  

Flashback on Nye’s debate with Morano on Piers Morgan on CNN: Warmists concede Bill Nye ‘looked outclassed and flustered’ against Climate Depot’s Morano in CNN primetime debate on Piers Morgan – Warmists at Little Green Footballs: ‘Morano threw too many talking points for Bill [Nye] to field effectively and as is common when a scientist goes up against a professional PR hack, he looked outclassed and flustered’ 

Watch Now: Climate Depot Debates Global Warming on UN TV At UN Summit in Nov. 2013! UN Host to Morano: ‘There is no need to shout’ — Morano: ‘The UN IPCC is first and foremost a political process, not scientific’ 

Watch Video Now: CNN Hosts Rare Live Contentious Global Warming Debate in December 2013 – Marc Morano vs. Sierra Club’s Michael Brune & Philippe Cousteau Jr. – Full Transcript – Morano: ‘So record cold is now evidence of man-made global warming? 

Stossel hosts Global Warming Debate Featuring Morano v. Nye! CLIMATE CHANGE: ‘Bill Nye the Science Guy, who says he is ‘frantic’ about climate change debates skeptic Marc Morano of ClimateDepot.com’ 

See previous debate between Morano and Nye here. 

Flashback 2012: Watch Now: CNN Climate Debate! Climate Depot’s Morano Debates Bill Nye the Science Guy on Piers Morgan — Updated Transcript Includes Citations


  • William Wilson

    If he does as well in his debate about Creationism, we can officially change his name to “Bill Nye The Loser Guy”. What a pathetic presentation. Granted, the facts are not on his side, but POTHOLES? Perhaps this is why friendly ol’ Bill Nye is coming off so angry lately: he knows he doesn’t have a leg to stand on, so all he has left is that annoyed “I am a SCIENTIST, how DARE you contradict me” attitude.

    Say goodnight, Bill.

    • Christopher Gosnell

      Bill Nye is a Mechanical Engineering graduate BSME (I don’t know if he is a P.E.) He is not a PhD ‘Scientist’ as far as I know.

    • gfw88

      I saw the creationism-v-evolution debate as well and he got his butt kicked in it too. He’s a typical right-coast lib – smug, arrogant, and ignorant who believes it is his job to enlighten the plebiscite. He believes it’s a dirty job but someone has to do it; and he’s probably hoping that ancient and exalted lodge of eggheads (east coat branch) will give him a medal.
      I say give the guy his walking papers – so we should all just turn off his show.

    • ArmyCombatVet

      Wow, just wow………..Bill Nye is a tool. The Mann Hockey Stick model, are you kidding me, it was totally debunked and retracted when Mann was faced with his BS unsupportable model. Science guy my foot. Confused the Antarctic with the Arctic, really? Morano blew him out of the water and Stossel, a very reasonable and a serious investigator was stunned by Nye’s idiotic, unsupportable statements. Little Billy is a sock puppet for the greatest criminal administration in American history. His educational vitae as a mechanical engineer (BS), can be extrapolated in a number of ways but a medical lab tech is not a cardiovascular surgeon and thus not a valid source of information on heart disease! I have done much research on this whole carbon footprint hysteria and it is in my humble opinion just that, hysteria, aimed at further controlling a dumbed down population. I happen to have a PhD in materials science and thus I’m not an expert in all maters of science nor do I claim to be but I can fairly easily disassemble Nye’s convoluted argument! In truth the real villain in climate change happens to be our Sun, our orbit around it and the varied activity occurring on the Sun’s surface that plays a critical role in our weather just as the moon controls the ocean’s tides.

  • dougproctor

    Nye’s reflex is to go back to basics: too many people, too much consumption, something has gotta give. CO2 is going up, will go up a lot more with both more people and more consumption, and something has to give. It could be bad. We should stop it before it is too late.

    That is it, that is the Nye argument. He isn’t saying that the current rise will kill us but that the trends in population and CO2 emissions SHOULD harm us in the relatively near future. Note “should”, as deduced by principle and popular/consensus modelling. Not current or recent observations.

    Nye’s position is essentially that of Malthus: exponential population increase in a geometrically rising food production environment. A simple principle that, assumptions being correct, is irrefutable. Like Malthus, however, Nye’s position is based on assumptions that are not being met in the real world. He is resisting the conclusion that his assumptions are wrong – like Ehrlich did with overpopulation, he is saying CAGW theory is not “wrong”, but perhaps the timeframe in which disaster will occur is a bit further in the future than first imagined.

    In Nye’s position, a rise of CO2 to 500 ppm that takes to 2400 is moot: it will destroy the biosphere to the point that calamitous, death-dealing changes occur. He is not arguing specific science or the match between theory and observation. He is arguing from fundamentals that he believes are unalterable truths. As things go the human and non-human world will burn; it is a not a matter of “if” but “when”. So we are obligated to act now, not later, as we would or should to any imminent crisis.

    Nye’s problem is that he cannot see that the skeptics are questioning his fundamentals and are doing so legitimately. Like the followers of Malthus (The Club of Rome), he has seen the future and it is hot and deadly. The skeptics say, maybe not. He says they are mistaking minor current details for the way of the Big Picture. Why? The fundamentals.

    Only when Erhlich admits he made a mistake will the likes of Nye consider he, too might be making a mistake. Fundamentals drive our world view, the paradigm in which we set our priorities and validate ourselves. A paradigm that means the future is not a runaway roller-coaster coming down our street reduces his position, if not invalidates it, as adaptation is not in his skill set or social power.

  • Iokobos

    Man designs roads, therefore he knows all the variables required to diagnose the problem and therefore control the pothole scenarios. And even then, the government does a terrible job at it.

    Man does not design the climate,and he does not know all the variables needed to diagnose the problem. How then can he attempt to control it?

  • derfelcadarn

    Nye first and most is a performer. His education is modest and not particularly diverse, his science is fine when aimed at children and the generalizations he makes are new knowledge to them. But to use his “expertize” as a basis for or even a defense of public policy is beyond even the Lefts severely limited ethics and intellects.

    • GerryMcGuire

      Performers perform. Nye doesn’t.

  • Tommy Tunez

    Like Al Gore & Obama – Bill Nye is an academic fraud. He is the last person that anyone will take seriously about Global Warming. If the Global Warming Con Men want to win converts to their scam they need to find a real scientist with real credentials to lead their circus.

  • TruthnMedia

    I saw a great film Mother: Caring for 7 Billion that talks about population and climate change. It explained what is going on really well. I recommend it.

  • Not_in_Denial

    I can’t believe that Bill Nye is referencing the ‘hockey stick’ graph, proven to be erroneous! That alone is enough to tell him to sit down and shut up. Mr. Morano, like so many others, has researched this subject, and more importantly what the scientific community is saying about it. Now that they aren’t in danger of losing their jobs due to opposing the ‘PC’ positions, hundreds more scientists have come out to speak about the idiocy of this scam perpetrated by people like Al Gore, who made millions off of this. It amazes me that Obama has the audacity to reference this junk science publicly. How much money is being wasted on this farce, billions!!! It’s inexcusable!

  • donnieduck

    After this and what he did on Meet the DePressed on 2/16, I WILL predict that Bill Nye the Science Guy will no longer be the go-to guy on the climate change debate. He got his a$$ handed to him by Morano. He sounds more like a liberal politician than a “Science Guy”: quoting the Hockey Stick graph as proof of increased warming? I don’t even think the meatheads at MSNBC reference that debunked and dishonored graph any more.

  • fistdeyuma

    This about money and power, a whole lot of money and power. It mean they can state myths and opinion as fact and it is up to real science to prove them wrong, 180 degrees from how to should be. It is billions vs. Cents with billions complaining about the cent’s funding.