UPDATE: video added below.
Tonight CFACT’s Marc Morano vs. Bill Nye the Science Guy CNN, Piers Morgan
9 PM EST
Marc Morano, Editor in Chief of Climate Depot, takes on Bill Nye the Science Guy.
Piers Morgan show, CNN 9 PM tonight (Tuesday) check your cable TV and satellite listing for Channel numbers
If you haven’t yet seen Marc in action, don’t miss this chance to see him live. Maybe he will ask about this video fiasco Nye did with Al Gore:
Why did they have to fake the experiment in post production if it was “high school science’ and so easy to replicate? Why hasn’t Nye called for this video to be removed from Gore’s website? (Still there over a year later) at http://climaterealityproject.org/video/ very first one top left.
Transcript at Newsbusters here
Im unclear why they even invited Nye.. the debate was between the “neutral talking head” and Marc.. Go Marc!!! Bottom line!! thank you!
Nicole says:
December 4, 2012 at 6:49 pm
“Do you people go to your politicians for a medical? Why are you going to them for climate change issues?
Ask a scientist.”
Nicole, what will you come up with to slander Dr. Lüning? See, we’re not “Going to ” Marc Morano for the science. He’s a layman speaking in the media.
Please explain how global climate models are expected to simulate the climate over 100 years when
a) the climate is chaotic
b) global climate models are models with a finite resolution and an arbitrary starting state.
It doesn’t take a scientist to ask this question, Nicole; all it needs is understanding the definition of the word chaos that even you or I can easily look up, for instance on the wikipedia.
trafamadore says:
December 4, 2012 at 9:34 pm
“My take on this is like the argument on creationism. Anti science, or selective science, is not for a debating club audience, and both sides are really not equal. The facts, alll of them, need to be out in the open, and evaluated. You can’t do that when someone is shouting selective data to say the earth temperature hasnt risen in 16 years.”
trafamadore, you have just declared the IPCC to be anti-scientific for which I tank you. The mission statement of the IPCC says that they have to find evidence for antropogenic global warming caused by CO2. They don’t accept evidence against it.
Good that we agree on the purely political nature of the IPCC.
Nicole says: “Do you people go to your politicians for a medical? Why are you going to them for climate change issues? ”
So why should we go to a scientist for our politics ?
The BIG problem with this whole mess is that some time around the 90s a whole lot of scientists decided that they had the right stuff to decide policy. But despite whatever science capabilities they had, their political skills did not seem to be any more sophisticated than exaggerating what where then legitimate concerns.
When this didn’t work and the world did not bow to their supposed self importance the exaggeration morphed into down right lies.
Stephen Schneider’s “dilemma” of whether to be truthful or honest came into play. That some are now openly talking about a “moral imperative” to lie.
The dishonestly does not stop here. Few of these ex-scientists (ex because they are not longer acting as objective scientists) declare they are now playing kindergarten level politics, they are still waving their authority as scientists whilst trying to wear another hat. Many have to a large degree corrupted their work and the presentation of their results to push a political world view with the full intent that this should influence policy.
So, Nicole, you do have a point. It makes as much sense to listen to these ex-scientist activists for policy as it would to go to a politician for a medical.
Marc, you did awfully bad on that interview. Your opponent didn’t have to say much and the impression left to the listener was that he won.
When you do this kind of interviews or debates, make sure to be as calm as possible and explain everything like you’d be explaining to a nine year old. And really, start from the basics:
– Yes, we have had very hot weather in US, but that really is weather. Other parts of the world have had a cooler summer.
– Yes, the storm did a lot of damage, but statistically, we have had a lot less severe storms than during the 20th century.
– We can’t just point at one summer or one storm and state that it proves how big the problem is. Europe has had several very cold winters and global warming proponents are quick to state how that’s just weather. We have to be very clear between, what is weather and what is climate.
– The alarmistic theory is that rising temperatures will cause extreme weather and catastrophic sea level rise. As the temperatures should rise more in the north, they should decrease temperature differences. And that actually causes less severe storms, not more.
– The sea level rise has been very slow for over 100 years without showing any acceleration whatsoever. So even if Greenland would melt faster, the socities would have plenty of time to react.
– Many people like to say that we should react nevertheless. First of all, we don’t have any evidence that these people have the means to control the climate. So it is very likely that we’d just end up paying a lot of higher taxes to people for nothing.
– But the worst thing about the current solutions is that they do not work. There’s a lot of talk about renewables, but they are not capable of large scale, reliable energy production. So we are investing a horrible amount of money on technology that won’t solve the problem. That is catastrophic.
Speaking as a Brit (snow here in Bedfordshire, this morning – brrrr!), I can inform you that the vast majority of the British public consider Piers ‘moron’ Morgan an absolute joke. The very idea that he could, in all seriousness, tell someone with Marc Morano’s intelligence and experience that in his view Morano is ‘wrong’ about CAGW is simply beyond a joke. I guess the irony might be lost on a US audience, but we Brits find the man’s misplaced, puffed-up sense of self-importance absolutelt hilarious. I wasn’t aware that Morgan had quietly become a skilled climate scientist since leaving good old Blighty, lol. I’d just like to take a moment to apologize on behalf of the UK for inflicting Morgan on US TV audiences.
Kudos to Mr Morano, once again, for enthusiastically going up against the deafened ears of warmist fear-merchants; despite Morano quoting peer-reviewed literature, countless reports and scientific studies, both Morgan and Nye remained, of course, absolutely closed-minded; totally unable to concede that Marc might actually have a point, let alone admit that peer-reviewed competing science brings into serious question, time and again, the entire shoddy edifice of CAGW propaganda.
Always a joy to watch Marc Morano in action – how on earth he keeps his calm when treated so very rudely and dismissively by so much of the mainstream media is a measure of the seasoned, professional media-savvy man he is.
“I cannot believe the attacks on the poster named Nicole for stating a simple undeniable fact that Marc Morano has no science expertise.”
Piers Morgan disputed the facts cited by Marc Morano. Is Piers Morgan a scientific expert? Why doesn’t Morgan’s lack of “expertise” also become an issue for Nicole?
By the way, Bill Nye’s credentialed “expertise” consists of a single bachelors degree in Mechnical Engineering (http://www.billnye.com/about-bill-nye/biography/). I suspect that my “expertise” trumps his by a considerable margin – and I agree with Morano.
That was an amazing performance, actually. Well, it’s just theater, right?
Yes, Marc had to do some shouting, but mostly because they simply tried to TUNE HIM OUT – and have their little gab-fest without him.
Actually, Nye spewed several of the most INCORRECT fallacies, the things that are “easy targets” for Skeptics.
His blase claim that the Medieval and Roman warm periods were in Europe only is clearly incorrect, and easy enough to refute. It’s not an oversight, Nye, it’s a LIE. You KNOW better, but you choose to lie about it.
His claim about “it’s not the amount, it’s the RATE”… there is no scientific basis for that statement. It’s a belief. It makes someone sound intelligent to anyone who has no knowledge of a subject, but grates on anyone who knows better. Not even a lie for that one, Nye, just…. you don’t do so well when winging it.
HOTTEST TWO DECADES ON RECORD. Of course, the only reasonably accurate record we have is 30 years. So it’s all about the framing of the statement, right? I mean, it’s either the hottest two, or HALF of the record shows no warming. This is a dishonest way to present information, and again I have to count this as a Nye Lie.
Marc was explaining the FACT that sea level is not rising at an accelerating rate and Nye sadly shakes his head and says “we just don’t agree on facts”… right, because the stuff that Nye seems to believe are facts, ARE NOT FACTS. Then Piers interrupts and says “I respect that you have views, I don’t think they’re facts”… in one of the most condescending performances that I’ve seen on TV for years.
Overall – Morano did a great job, but it was an ambush, as we all figured it would be.
Isn’t the person who called Nicole an airhead in the very same message where he ranted against her supposed “ad hominem” attacks being just a tiny bit hypocritical?
Stephen Schneider’s “dilemma” of whether to be
truthful or honestcame into play.Stephen Schneider’s “dilemma” of whether to be honest or effective came into play.
[Reply: Use angle brackets for html markers. Fixed it. -ModE ]
See there is it again: The Roman warming and the MWP were local! BS.The fact that they were world wide demolishes CAGW. Anyway what do you expect from these type of people? Sad! Well done Marc, and well said in the limited time you had.
Nye was politely unimpressive whilst Morano was aggressively unimpressive. Morano would be more believable if he engaged in a manner more likely to sway the undecided. He didn’t come over that well. A shame as he obviously knows his stuff.Mind you it was two against one with added alarmist pictrures.
Piers Morgan lives the high life, I wonder if he would be prepared to lead by example and cut his co2 levels to those of the average joe?
tonyb
Piers Morgan couldn’t logically think his way out a wet paper bag, his arguments were terrible. Nye obviously is selective in what he reads, and I would be surprised if he gets past the headlines, he was unable to talk in depth about anything. He made Piers look intelligent. The whole thing was a tedious argument. Morano obviously had the better argument but the way he came across is not going to convince the casual watcher. Ring side judges? Unanimous decision, Marc Morano.
Wow, this was like watching a climate discussion on the BBC – a setup and an ambush where anybody that has a different perspective is shouted down and interrupted so the point can never be made properly.
All good science…….
Couple of things.
One, I think the fact that dissenting voices are now appearing in prominent places means we’ve made tremendous progress against Warmism.
Two, I think it’s great that some Warmists are coming on WUWT, sure they seem snippy and all they do is repeat their appeal to ‘authority’…but at least they’re getting a glimpse of what real science involves (let’s hope they’re checking the excellent sidebars).
I imagine the rough and tumble of open debate must feel very strange to them after the controlled echo chambers they normally inhabit!
Who knows we may end up turning a few of them.
When going on TV or other live media, one should take along a time piece(s) similar to the one used in chess tournaments. Measure each person’s time talking. Make sure it’s visible to the camera. Morano got about 1/3rd the air time as Bill the Science Dud.
What I love about this clip is the Precautionary Principle. Someone should think about a sound bite that destroys that “logic”. Something like “Planes fly and kill people. We should quit flying per you logic. Be careful going home and watch the sky.”
Well, it is called the adiabatic gas law, innit, Mark?
Um, yeah, but there’s so much more than “it doesn’t hold” (paraphrased) in our atmosphere.
M
…
And there is so much more to it than “it’s hotter where the pressure is greater, therefore T is proportional to P”, that your sigh should have been placed there, if you cared anything about science since the adiabatic gas law does NOT apply at the atmospheric level don’t trot it out to argue the point.
And, by the way, since Jupiter has an internal heat source in it’s atmosphere, don’t you think it’s a really really bad choice for arguing comparisons to Earth?
I guess my question is simple. What if Bill Nye is wrong vs What if Marc Morano is wrong. Better safe than sorry I would say.
Ken C. asks: “I guess my question is simple. What if Bill Nye is wrong vs What if Marc Morano is wrong. Better safe than sorry I would say.”
Indeed. It completely sucks if Bill Nye is wrong and all the investments in renewables and huge increases in electricity, fuel, coal and food prizes has been unnecessary. If Bill Nye is wrong, he will have a lot of economically disastrous decisions on his conciense. And a huge amount of lives too as rising costs hit poor people very bad and cause illness and death.
Ken C. says:
December 5, 2012 at 4:19 am
I guess my question is simple. What if Bill Nye is wrong vs What if Marc Morano is wrong. Better safe than sorry I would say.
Well, Bill Nye’s “opinions” and Bill Nye’s distortions of facts and Bill Nye’s groundless fears will kill people. Millions of people. Millions of people immediately through bad water, bad food storage, no transportation, no fertilizer, illness and starvation and disease. Bill Nye’s fears will kill people through cold, insects, malnutrition, and parasites.
Bill Nye’s fears WILL sentence billions to a continued life in poverty, fear, and desperation.
Lower cost energy (and moral politicians worldwide!) will preserve life and improve health. More CO2 means 17% to 27% more plant growth worldwide for food, fuel, fertilizer, fodder, and farming. A better life for eery living thing on earth.
So, to your “precautionary principle” ….
A GUARANTEED failure by restricting energy and killing people because of a distorted “fear” of the world’s fertilizer and longer growing seasons? A GUARANTEED death to millions because of fear of a gas that “might” – but hasn’t !! – raise temperatures – IF the (proven wrong!) programs of so-called scientists – “might be” correct?
Or a 99.95% chance of a better life for all? (Hmmmn. A 100% chance of a better life – if we get rid of the immoral UN and US and UK and NZ and Aussie and third world politicians?)
My impression? Nye was poorly prepared yet smug. Piers Morgan kept couching the argument in mutually exclusive terms, excusable, I suppose, because he is a self-professed layman. But saying that CO2 and population are both rising, and in the next sentence saying “it’s warm” or the like, is a statement of disconnected facts, yet he tries to imply a connection of sorts. Morano has a good grasp of the facts from the skeptical sides, no doubt. What is telling is Nye’s look of utter distain when countered, and then when Piers interrupts him to go back to Morano, that look intensifies. Was there a winner? Nope. In typical CNN fashion, the moderator stirs up some sediment and the opposing sides become obscured. Was it a lively debate? Nope. Nye was trying to hide behind his “scienceyness”. Morano had no time to make any counter arguments.
I eagerly await Nicole’s rebuttal…
Bill Nye claims that the Medieval warming period was just in Europe. Well, it may be local or global. We don’t know for sure, but Bill thinks that MWP doesn’t count because it was local. However, they do use one year’s heat wave and one storm as evidence for global warming and here we do know that it absolutely was local and it lasted a way shorter time than the MWP.
Phil Ford says:
December 5, 2012 at 1:08 am
……………………..I’d just like to take a moment to apologize on behalf of the UK for inflicting Morgan on US TV audiences.
—————————————
Yeah, isn’t it enough we have Chris Mathews, Ted Turner and Joe Biden?
And to the Aussies, When you dump Julia, please don’t send her here to the US.
We breed our own idiots locally.
Thank you, very much.
cn
Was this Piers’ big push to get a job with the BBC? His views are obviously a perfect fit.
I thought Morano did well in the circumstances.
Bill Nye has become such a joke it is silly. Has he turned his brain off, or was he always that devoid of thinking capacity?