Bill Nye Loses HIs Sh*t to get Global Warming Message Across

[Guest]

1 minute ago, mpt said:

Actually there are a lot of references to what he presents.  A simple google search will reveal what he has continuously said about climate change.

That’s nice. This has absolutely nothing to do with what you quoted. 

[mpt]

1 minute ago, Jack_T said:

Do you actually believe that there is such a shortage of ecological problems in the world that academia has to resort to fabricating crises for funding?

 

Give your head a shake.

If you don’t believe he is politically motivated, give your head a shake

[Guest]

Just now, mpt said:

If you don’t believe he is politically motivated, give your head a shake

The problem here is I have proof - mountains and mountains of scientific evidence. You have jack $&!# and can’t even formulate a logically sound argument, never mind a convincing one. 

[mpt]

15 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

The problem here is I have proof - mountains and mountains of scientific evidence. You have jack $&!# and can’t even formulate a logically sound argument, never mind a convincing one. 

You have proof that scientists agree that the world will increase its temperature by 6 degrees in the next 100 years like Bill Nye stated?   A simple internet search will show you they don’t agree.  They also don’t agree that America can solve the problem when India and China are big influencers to the problem and don’t give a crap about it; which is again backed by evidence.  Halting the US economy to solve a problem that they don’t know how to solve also doesn’t solve the problem.  Maybe AOC was right, we are all going to die in 12 years, she must be a scientist too.

 

 

Here’s some proof for you.

https://www.cato.org/carbon-tax-temperature-savings-calculator

If America cuts its CO2 to net zero.  By 2100 they can reduce the global temperature by 0.2 degrees.  0.2 degrees in the next 100 years and at a cost of trillions of dollars.  I’d rather by an air conditioner for 300 bucks

Edited May 16, 2019 by mpt

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, mpt said:

You have proof that scientists agree that the world will increase its temperature by 6 degrees in the next 100 years like Bill Nye stated?   A simple internet search will show you they don’t agree.  They also don’t agree that America can solve the problem when India and China are the biggest influencers to the problem; which is again backed by evidence.  Halting the US economy to solve a problem that they don’t know how to solve also doesn’t solve the problem.  Maybe AOC was right, we are all going to die in 12 years, she must be a scientist too.

So basically what you’re saying is this:

 

1. Nye is a goof and should be ignored.

2. There is no scientific consensus on the magnitude of impact.

3. The US doesn’t know how to stop climate change so why bother. 

4. It will cost too much.

5. China and India are moving ahead regardless.

6. Everyone dies anyways.

 

Anything else you’d like to add in an attempt to make something stick? 

[mpt]

7 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

So basically what you’re saying is this:

 

1. Nye is a goof and should be ignored.

2. There is no scientific consensus on the magnitude of impact.

3. The US doesn’t know how to stop climate change so why bother. 

4. It will cost too much.

5. China and India are moving ahead regardless.

6. Everyone dies anyways.

 

Anything else you’d like to add in an attempt to make something stick? 

Not what I’m saying at all, but good try trying to read in between the lines.

 

Here is basically what I’m saying:

Nye is a goof who makes a career on going on TV as a celebrity to rally for the democrats because they want government control of the entire population.

There is scientific consensus that climate change is occurring.

The US by themselves can’t change the problem so why stop the economy because a strong economy with more money and more innovation has a better chance at solving the problem as technology continues to improve.

Right now you can’t solve the problem because even if the USA goes net zero in CO2, it’ll change the world temp by 0.2 degrees in 100 years.

The world has to work together if you can even have a chance at solving climate change

AOC is an idiot

 

That pretty much sums it up.

Edited May 16, 2019 by mpt

[Wilbur]

4 minutes ago, mpt said:

Not what I’m saying at all, but good try trying to read in between the lines.

 

Here is basically what I’m saying:

Nye is a goof who makes a career on going on TV as a celebrity to rally for the democrats because they want government control of the entire population.

There is scientific consensus that climate change is occurring.

The US by themselves can’t change the problem so why stop the economy because a strong economy with more money and more innovation has a better chance at solving the problem as technology continues to improve.

Right now you can’t solve the problem because even if the USA goes net zero in CO2, it’ll change the world temp by 0.2 degrees in 100 years.

The world has to work together if you can even have a chance at solving climate change

AOC is an idiot

 

That pretty much sums it up.

If the Democrats are trying to use the climate change crisis to control the population, they're doing a really really REALLY bad job of it.  

[mpt]

6 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

If the Democrats are trying to use the climate change crisis to control the population, they're doing a really really REALLY bad job of it.  

The Democrats use everything to try and control the population, they are the party of big government.  I agree they are doing a really bad job of it, hence why Trump is probably going to get another 4 years.

 

The Democrats do say vote for us or you are all going to die in 12 years, you want a reference?  Read AOC’s the green new deal because she’s the boss supposedly.  At least with AOC we’ll all be eating dog in the streets but we’ll still be alive in 12 years... LOL

Edited May 16, 2019 by mpt

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

If the Democrats are trying to use the climate change crisis to control the population, they're doing a really really REALLY bad job of it.  

It’s easier for some to believe that than big industry being financially motivated to cast doubt. But because they can google these reports designed to plant the seed of doubt, they believe they’re free thinkers above the norm. 

 

It boggles the mind.

 

[canuckistani]

38 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

The problem here is I have proof - mountains and mountains of scientific evidence. You have jack $&!# and can’t even formulate a logically sound argument, never mind a convincing one. 

Show us this 'mountains and mountains' of scientific evidence, please. 

[mpt]

5 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

It’s easier for some to believe that than big industry being financially motivated to cast doubt. But because they can google these reports designed to plant the seed of doubt, they believe they’re free thinkers above the norm. 

 

It boggles the mind.

 

It also boggles the mind when people believe everything they hear especially from a position of authority, like a mechanical engineer with a Bachelors degree and ran a kids TV show.  Just because he yells a lot and gets emotional, he must be 100% right.

Edited May 16, 2019 by mpt

[canuckistani]

50 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

Are you trying to suggest that what Nye states isn’t representative of the scientific community? 

 

 

yes. There are plenty of scientists who dispute Nye's proclamations that include actual geologists, physicists, etc. Not to mention, since when does 'consensus' matter in empirical evidence driven scientific hypothesis/theory anyways ? How much consensus did Einstien have again when he published TSR ? In any case, you said you have mountains of evidence- show us the said evidence ( not opinions or proclamations but actual data). 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, mpt said:

It also boggles the mind when people believe everything they hear especially from a position of authority, like a mechanical engineer with a Bachelors degree and ran a kids TV show.  Just because he yells a lot and gets emotional, he must be 100% right.

While I certaintly don’t claim to be anything close to an expert, I do have a degree in a related field. I am comfortable with his position. 

 

 

[Miler]

12 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

China has built massive, and I mean massive, solar panel fields. They are, in fact, the world's largest producer of photovoltaic (light into energy) power.

Solar provided under 2% of China's electricity in 2017.

 

11 hours ago, Violator said:

China is still building coal plants like its going out of style.

To power electric cars. (coal fired cars, yay!)

 

 

4 hours ago, canuckistani said:

Nope. But then again, the planet cannot accomodate infinite number of ants either. Doesn't change the fact that we can easily accomodate billions more people if we didn't live the consumer-driven western lifestyle. 

Western world is by far the biggest per capita consumer of resources on this planet and the western world is also by far the lowest in the world in terms of birth rates. Ergo, reduction of population is irrelevant to the global resource crisis. Western lifestyle is to blame, not # of people. 

 

Wrong. It's pipelines. Canadian pipelines to be exact.

 

3 hours ago, Wilbur said:

The "Ice Age" theory came from two things:  1)  changes in the Earth's orbit  2) the cooling effect from smog aerosols.  If it wasn't for our extra CO2 we could've seen some cooling but we keep on blasting it up there so...yeah.

 

As for less atmospheric C02 than expected, that's because the oceans have been absorbing most of it (as well as a lot of the heat).  The oceans won't be able to absorb forever though.

 

As for the "production gap", before humans were on the planet the Earth's climate changed due to fluctuations in energy from the sun (mainly from orbital variations) as well as volcanic eruptions.  Focusing on the fluctuations from the sun, yes, temperature would rise a bit first, warming the oceans.  As the oceans warmed they would release more of their carbon dioxide starting a feed back loop to even more warming.  CO2 in the atmosphere does cause warming, otherwise we'd be as cold as the moon.

Water vapor keeps us from being like the moon. CO2 is a small player. Way more CO2 is produced naturally than by man.

[mpt]

4 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

While I certaintly don’t claim to be anything close to an expert, I do have a degree in a related field. I am comfortable with his position. 

 

 

Thats nice, I have a Bachelors and Masters in Science from the University of Alberta, and a 4 year post Masters graduate program, and I comfortable saying Bill Nye is a politically motivated celebrity hack who dresses in a stupid outfit to use a position of authority to convince the world that if you don’t agree with everything I say then you must be a climate change denier and the cause of the problem.  While I do agree climate change is occurring and it has a significant human impact, everything else is anecdotal and evidence suggests won’t be effective with what he has proposed.

Edited May 16, 2019 by mpt

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, mpt said:

Thats nice, I have a Bachelors and Masters in Science from the University of Alberta, and a 4 year post Masters graduate program, and I comfortable saying Bill Nye is a celebrity hack who dresses in a stupid outfit to use a position of authority to convince the world that if you don’t agree with everything I say then you must be a climate change denier and the cause of the problem.

How funny it would be if your background was in mechanical engineering.

Edited May 16, 2019 by Guest

[mpt]

1 minute ago, Jack_T said:

How funny it would be if your background was in mechanical engineering.

I wish I made a career about running a kids science show in the 90s and then get a lifetime job to go on CNN as an expert and swear at everyone.  I wonder what Beekman’s World is up to?  The rat guy should go on CNN and replace Don Lemon, he’d do a more accurate job!

[mpt]

5 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

How funny it would be if your background was in mechanical engineering.

I also don’t wear a lab coat so there’s that

[Wilbur]

21 minutes ago, Miler said:

Solar provided under 2% of China's electricity in 2017.

 

To power electric cars. (coal fired cars, yay!)

 

 

Wrong. It's pipelines. Canadian pipelines to be exact.

 

Water vapor keeps us from being like the moon. CO2 is a small player. Way more CO2 is produced naturally than by man.

Sorry, my mistake.  Yes, water vapour is the main trapper of heat, that still doesn't mean rising levels of CO2 doesn't trap heat and is driving the climate change feedback loop at this time.  Yes, there are natural forces that produce CO2, but we're tipping the scales.

[Wilbur]

54 minutes ago, mpt said:

The Democrats use everything to try and control the population, they are the party of big government.  I agree they are doing a really bad job of it, hence why Trump is probably going to get another 4 years.

 

The Democrats do say vote for us or you are all going to die in 12 years, you want a reference?  Read AOC’s the green new deal because she’s the boss supposedly.  At least with AOC we’ll all be eating dog in the streets but we’ll still be alive in 12 years... LOL

Okaaaayyyy, and the Republicans try to control everything by rigging the markets and banking systems in their favour.

 

The Republicans say vote for us and you'll be rich.  Read Trumps The Art of the Deal because he's a stable genius.  At least with Trump we'll all be eating lobster in our mansions, ignoring all the climate refugees trying to sneak through the wall.

 

And yes, that's hyperbole, but so is the above quote.