Programming note Morano vs. Nye (but Nye backs out at last minute)

UPDATE:

Morano emailed me from his phone just before the interview started @925PM :

I was literally only informed of Nye backing out 6 min. before segment to begin by CNN producer.

yet somehow they found a Sierra Club guy Michael Brune, who instead of debating factually, immediately launched a “big oil” smear campaign claiming Marc’s Climate Depot is funded by Chevron. What a lamer.

Video here: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2013/01/24/pmt-climate-change-marc-morano-michael-brune.cnn

==============================================================

Round Two! CFACT’s Marc Morano vs. Bill Nye the Science Guy
tonight on CNN

Last month, CFACT’s Marc Morano debated global warming with Bill Nye the Science Guy on CNN. This evening, Piers Morgan has invited them both back for another round.

Piers Morgan show, CNN 9 PM EST tonight (Wednesday)
Global warming alarmists rarely agree to public debates, so I hope you have a chance to tune in, as it promises to be exciting!

About these ads

34 thoughts on “Programming note Morano vs. Nye (but Nye backs out at last minute)

  1. Ding ding…

    i suspect that Bill Nye the Science Wannabe Guy has been schooled since his last beatdown…

  2. From Bill Nyes Wiki page…

    Nye began his career in Seattle at Boeing, where, among other things, he starred in training films and developed a hydraulic pressure resonance suppressor still used in the 747.

    Is it just me being old & cynical but, rarely do individuals develop anything in an organisation like Boeing? Are they just bigging him up?

    DaveE.

  3. Maybe I’m too cynical — but why would they not fix the debate — knowing they will lose a fair debate?

    The facts seem to tell the opposite story to the preferred narrative — so what do you do when you have a point to make??? Help the truth come out? I think not!

  4. Dave;

    I’m not riding to Nye’s rescue here, but you’d be surprised how much a company the size of Boeing would let one guy design. . . especially that long ago.

  5. You think the Sierra guy Michael Brune has been hibernating for sometime now that he has not heard of this idol Al Gore working with big oil ( not companies but big oil states).

  6. The CNN video of the segment rather conveniently cuts off before Marc has a chance to respond to Brune. Talk about media bias! No doubt CNN/Morgan will spin it to try and refute that.

    Note also how Brune links together sound-bites to make them look like scientific facts, but don’t be fooled. He even thinks the ‘green’ mitigation actions that are supposed to have already happened have reduced CO2 levels (not that CO2 is a problem), but the fact is that it’s the switch from coal to gas that has done it, nothing else, except perhaps depressed economic activity, but certainly not ‘clean’, i.e. renewable energy, So what is it Brunie, is gas clean or dirty? You can’t have it both ways.

  7. Brune – credibility = ZERO. What a parrot! Does he have anything intelligent to say, other than simply to spew out the same old rehearsed deflective responses. “Science is settled” (refuse to debate/discuss). “You’re not a climate scientist” (double standards) “Blog is funded by Chevron and big oil” (outright lie to smear)…..You are a BORE Mr. Brune. I’ll wet my pants with excitement the day when a warmist and realist actually debate the SCIENCE.

  8. Did he seriously say ” the science is settled”? What kind of person takes that phrase to an honest debate these days?

  9. my favorite part was when the sierra club person was claiming that US emmisions had gone down due to alternative energy and Marc M corrected him by saying it was because of fracking. I think Mr Morano came across very well – nice job!

  10. Brune says “he’s not a climate scientist”. Brune has a BS degrees in Economics and Finance, according to Greenpeace. Is Brune disqualifying his own opinion in the matter?

  11. Slartibartfast says:
    January 24, 2013 at 5:57 am

    Brune says “he’s not a climate scientist”. Brune has a BS degrees in Economics and Finance, according to Greenpeace. Is Brune disqualifying his own opinion in the matter?
    ===================
    Only when the debate got hard and he was losing.

  12. Did Brune speak any original words? He was like a robot spewing sound bites and ad hominem attacks! While a thinking person would conclude that Brune is an ignorant propagandist, I regretfully point out that most politicians get elected by doing the exact same thing.

  13. I’ll bet Morano doesn’t get another interview with Nye, a Sierra Club or Greenpeace guy. All Morano has to do is talk about the money that fossil fuels are giving these groups to discredit them, especially as natural gas is the energy competitor for coal and oil.

    The recognized hiatus in warming (except for Tamino or Stoat) is a big problem for them. As is the ramped up CO2 that should be accelerating warming. And that fracking, another eco-green bete noir, is responsible for decrease in CO2 output – along with the loss of American jobs: let’s see them encourage either of those!

    It’s not just Gore who has to get out. Nye knows he’s losing.

    I’ll bet McKibben can’t refuse a debate with Morano, though … his ego won’t let him.

    Perhaps Morano can have a debate with an Empty Chair with a rotating group of photos representing the ones who have refused to debate with him.

  14. Videos of “entire interviews” are hard to come by. Suggestion to Marc et al: insist on them as a precondition.

  15. That is the full video. The only thing missing is Piers cutting me off and abruptly ending the segment.

  16. Seems that CNN has been cutting off “skeptics” during interviews either by cutting short the time or mysterious losses of microphones or signals from remote locations. No agenda on their part sarc.

  17. Bottom line is the alarmists have two basic talking points 1) the science is proven (when its not), and they never describe the proven science, and 2) the skeptics are either science deniers or funded by big oil.

    Morano does a very good job, as does Lord Monckton, of presenting a clear and intuitive case against the AGW hoax. The reason why the alramists hyping the AGW hoax cant explain it clearly is because its based on junk science that defies intuitive reasoning.

    • Here’s the key thing that should be gleaned from all the alarmist baloney.
      If the science is “settled” then no further research is necessary. Therefore, all research funding should be cut off.

Comments are closed.