Bill Nye - The Completely Wrong Progressive Tool Guy

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Bill Nye to Tucker Carlson: Humans Cause '100 Percent' of Climate Change



Bill Nye, a mechanical engineer and "science guy" television personality, appeared on "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Monday evening to discuss climate change. Pushed by Fox host Tucker Carlson on exactly what percentage of climate change is caused by humans, Nye gave a very unscientific answer — 100 percent. He said climate "deniers" suffer "cognitive dissonance," but maybe it is the "science guy" himself who cannot accept that there is reason to doubt climate change.

When Carlson asked, "to what extent is human activity responsible for speeding up [climate change]?" Nye responded, "One hundred percent. Humans are causing it to happen catastrophically fast."

The problem with this answer should be obvious from a scientific perspective. During the show, Carlson acknowledged that the climate is changing, and even that human activity might be contributing to it. But as he explained, "the core question from what I can tell is, why the change? Is it part of the endless cycle of climate change or is human activity causing it?"

If human activity has an impact, then to what degree? Carlson asked, "Is 100 percent of climate change caused by human activity? Is it 23.4 percent? It's settled science, please tell me to what degree human activity is responsible."

Rather than pointing to a specific number, Nye hemmed and hawed. He argued that "instead of happening on timescales of millions of years, or let's say 15,000 years, it's happening on the timescale of decades, and now years." But the self-described "science guy" dodged the fundamental question — to what degree is human action exacerbating climate change? And how can we be sure?
 

black dog

Free America
I happened to catch the show last night,
Bill Nye should stick to teaching High School Science class, he is undergunned when playing with the big boys.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
To ask if we are impacting the environment is silly. Of course we are. To ask how much is, as the story illustrates, the obvious next question. In asking that the next question is 'how good or bad is that?"

There is EVERY bit as much reason to consider that rising CO2 levels will be a net plus as a net minus. To claim CO2 is rising and shriek about it, to claim we impact the environment and NOT ask 'good or bad' and then 'how good or bad' is silly.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
To even debate the science behind climate cycles...to even go there and waste the time...is exactly the "look, squirrel!" facet of the entire subject that it's devotees want to promote. The goal is is to mask the real activities and objectives that are all geared toward globalization, global wealth transfer and the eventual destruction of current-day capitalism.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
To even debate the science behind climate cycles...to even go there and waste the time...is exactly the "look, squirrel!" facet of the entire subject that it's devotees want to promote. The goal is is to mask the real activities and objectives that are all geared toward globalization, global wealth transfer and the eventual destruction of current-day capitalism.

There's certainly some of that but we don't need to go into grand conspiracies to understand the mundane interests of simply chasing after research dollars. "We see no real problems here but would you mind funding us a bunch of money so we can keep looking at it?"

Hell, the oil companies LOVE this ####. It gives them the cover to make 'green' gas and oil. And charge more for it. China digs it selling us solar panels and beanie caps.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
the mundane interests of simply chasing after research dollars. "We see no real problems here but would you mind funding us a bunch of money so we can keep looking at it?"

.

Funny..I was going to mention that in my last post, but decided to stick to the main point. The overarching galas are certainly NOT being hidden; there are any number of folks involved that have openly stated or admitted that they are focused on leveraging a faux environmental crisis entirely in order to transfer wealth to developing countries and "punish" capitalism until it yields or collapses.

On a positive note; I have to admit I'm quite impressed with the rapid technological and economic strides that have been made in wind power production around the world. All driven, of course, by the reactions to AGM hysterics. Interestingly though...not here in the US yet. We're way behind countries like Germany, UK, Denmark, Norway...way behind.
 
Last edited:

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Funny..I was going to mention that in my last post, but decided to stick to the main point. The overarching galas are certainly NOT being hidden; there are any number of folks involved that have openly stated or admitted that they are focused on leveraging a faux environmental crisis entirely in order to transfer wealth to developing countries and "punish" capitalism until it yields or collapses.

To focus on that, again, follow the money. Does Exxon, or any other big oil company want little tin pot countries doing their own oil? Or, would they rather 'pay' a carbon tax, give money to these under developing people in exchange for them NOT doing oil?
Bigger restaurants, long ago, got on board with disability acts and smoking rules like air system and so forth because they knew they could pay for that crap and reap the reward of all the little guys being wiped out.

Sure, there are 'touchy feely' groups and ideas going on. That said, follow the money.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Bigger restaurants, long ago, got on board with disability acts and smoking rules like air system and so forth because they knew they could pay for that crap and reap the reward of all the little guys being wiped out.

That smells like a conspiracy theory to me. :belvak:
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Does Exxon, or any other big oil company want little tin pot countries doing their own oil? Or, would they rather 'pay' a carbon tax, give money to these under developing people in exchange for them NOT doing oil?



damn are you paranoid ...

... how about the little country selling its OIL to Exxon
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
damn are you paranoid ...

... how about the little country selling its OIL to Exxon

It's not paranoid. It's logic.

Who is going to do a better, cleaner job of the work, the enormous company or Zulu Brothers Oil drilling and lamb chops?

So, Exxon, again, can absorb the cost and gain in the process.

Damn, you're naïve.
 
Top