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
Not only was it 2 against 1, but Nye got to be in the studio in warm surroundings and Morano was a talking head on the screen.
Nye means well but does not look at as wide a range of materials as he should. The TV guy is a TV guy. I’m sure he means well too.
Compare the economic impact in dollars of the damage caused by Sandy and the economic impact in dollars of the results of the Los Angeles union strikes at the port and tell me that global warming is a concern.
I love the impartiality of the host. And how when Marc wanted to talk science he got interrupted. I guess the science doesn’t sell like horror stories do.
I still can’t understand why Piers Morgan has never faced charges for allegedly being involved in share price rigging when he was the editor of the Daily Mirror and why he hasn’t yet faced charges for allegedly being involved in phone hacking, also when editor of the Daily Mirror. Might it be something to do with the fact that the Daily Mirror isn’t a Murdoch newspaper?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/jul/27/piersmorgan-phone-hacking
and
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/the-media-column-the-piers-morgan-that-you-wont-read-about-in-the-newspapers-6169228.html
[deleted by request mod]
Mods – in my previous post please remove url link to order-order. Profanities in comments section – apologies!
Whenever there is a debate on this issue on TV or radio, any mainstream media organisation will NEVER put up a climate scientist to rebut the sort of nonsense propagated by Bill Nye. As well as Marc Morano performs, viewers will see him, rightly or wrongly, as a blogging nerd and take a view accordingly. Although I am against the argument from authority principal, it is a necessity when dealing with the media, as they will naturally side with the warmists, and use these arguments to underline how mainstream the warmist view is, and how marginal the opposition. I feel they deliberately populate the anti-CAGW debate with those they can determine as amateurs or non-scientists, irrespective of the fact that Mr. Morano did acquit himself very well, and did offer a sound argument. After all, you need a strong character, and constitution, when dealing with Piers Moron.
As much as Mr. Morano might be flattered or tempted next time he’s offered air time, he should agree to appear and then present Richard Lindzen or any other of the available heavyweight sceptics, to eat the likes of Nye for breakfast, and put the patronising Moron in his place when he spouts his ignorance on the subject.
Bill Nye said very little…except the obvious. Population up, co2 up, temperature up. But he did say that Hurricane Sandy wasn’t really that bad. Hmmmm I’m a little confused about his claims about the medieval warm period not being global. Obviously he’s implying that its not an accurate measure, but wasn’t the temperature data used by Mann only from Northern Hemisphere? I don’t know, I’m just an ordinary gal with no background in science trying to muddle through this all this STUFF. But one thing I can recognize is a Jackass when I see one. Piers , your voice is like nails on a chalkboard to me…..
***
Mark T says:
December 4, 2012 at 7:10 pm
Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer. Splain to me how this works again?
***
Maybe Bill the Shill Guy has a BS in ME, but so do I, and I can tell he never, ever worked in a real engineering job (where working for many yrs, one gets truly educated). He’s a typical anemic, pencil-neck academic w/no real work experience.
That was a terrible so-called “debate” it seemed rushed and interrupted, I would have liked to have heard Bill Nye’s and Marc Morano’s view in detail with an unbiased presenter (or one who is fair and has a reserved opinion) , CNN has an authority complex and I like to build my own opinions therefore after watching this I now have a lower opinion of CNN.
Well done to both Bill Nye and Marc Morano for an honest attempt at open dialogue.
Nicole says:
December 4, 2012 at 6:49 pm
I’m a scientist.
Your problem with that is I’m not a recipient of global warming grants or working for a recipient of such funding. As a consequence, I’m a skeptic–an independent mind: I don’t see the case for the policies being perpetrated by the UN and other government bodies who are supported by highly dubious “climate science” designed to tax and control. Mr. Ban of the UN is an excellent example of this.
I’m also an engineer.
I see some of the “climate solutions” proposed to counter “global warming” and just shake my head. The vast majority are so poorly designed and based on such questionable data that no engineer would stake his professional reputation on them (there must be a tight cadre of “climate engineers” with the same tawdry reputation as “climate scientists” making these proposals).
Bottom line: None of the evidence (not hype) from the “climate scientists” is sufficient to implement the proposals currently offered by the “climate engineers”. However, that hasn’t stopped the “climate politicians” from using scare tactics and horrendous propaganda to impose taxes and control on earth’s population, with much more to come.
Meanwhile, you “climate lackeys” fail to properly inform yourselves and are the real problem: Were enough people to become sufficiently informed, we’d not have stupendously stupid positions like “CO2 is a toxin” and “Sandy was caused by Global Warming”. No, such positions would be laughed at and met with public derision and scorn.
As a consequence, “climate scientists” would eventually lose most of their funding; “climate engineers” wouldn’t have silly projects to consider, “climate politicians” would have to actually help their constituents, and “climate lackeys” would be informed and thinking logically. Meanwhile, “climate economists” would normally step up with cost/benefit analyses that would shut this whole charade down in a heartbeat; rather, their funding is based on a continuation of the charade.
Apparently I’m asking too much of all these “climate” groups, but the world can no longer afford them.
@Nicole:
“Do you people go to your politicians for a medical? Why are you going to them for climate change issues? ”
You think today’s climate science compares to today’s medical science where millions and billions of patients lives and deaths have been studied? I think climate science (where the patient is the earth) is not yet mature enough to be compared to medieval doctors prescribing leaches to suck out the bad blood.
What the dickens is this stuff Nye is spouting about the rate if CO2 increase? Is that a new alarmist attempt at fear-mongering? Has anyone suggested that the rate has anything to do with hypothetical ‘global warming’, or anything else for that matter?
The idea that you can ‘debate’ the issues concerning ‘climate change’ in 10-12 minutes is absurd. Given the time constraint, clearly Marc decided his best tactic was to spout as many facts as he could. Hard to sound calm and reasonable when you attempt that. Nye sounded calm, if not half-asleep, and what he said made no sense at all (especially when garbled by Morgan), but doubtless the average viewer would find Nye more appealing. TV, remember, is a ‘cool’ medium.
I got an appeal from Bill Nye to rejoin The Planetary Society, with which he is now associated. I scrawled a few words to the effect of “I will rejoin when you guys stop endorsing the CAGW hoax” and sent it back in their Business Reply envelope.
/Mr Lynn
We will have much of the answer by decade end, because we have the prolong solar minimum which causes cooling versus co2 increases which suppose to cause warming. Let us see the temperature response ,which I bet will be lower before this decade ends for the globe by at least minus .5c
If this turns out to be correct those of us who support solar as opposed to greenhouse gases as the main factor in determining the climate of the earth will be correct.
Nicole says:
December 4, 2012 at 6:07 pm
Marc Morano has no climate science expertise…
________________________________
And Bill Nye got his from Al Gore BWAAAAAaa
@trafamadore
you say:
“intelligently dispute”? Well the stupid “16 years with no warming” is one that is tiresome.
Because, the “16″ is cherry picked to be exactly on the 98 El Niño. If you use 17 years or 15 years, it doesn’t work…..snip
Let me pick up on that if I may? I’ve heard this cherry picking argument before and it simply does not hold water. You and others fall into the trap of assuming that the 16 years ago is the starting point chosen for the benefit of an argument. That’s blatantly incorrect.
When you wish to determine for how long warming has stalled then today is your starting point. That’s the only date you can ‘cherry pick’ .
You work backwards from today and you let the data determined the period at which the warming has stalled. That happens to be some 16 years ago ( which is not the 1998 el nino year as you claim but that’s another matter ). You see, it’s impossible to cherry pick the date at which the rate of warming ceased to be a positive trend because you simply follow the data from today and can’t come to any other conclusion however it suits your argument or otherwise. To pick a period longer or shorter would be simply ‘doing it wrong’ or telling lies.
It’s 16 years of no statistically significant warming because that’s what the data show and not because it’s convenient to an argument. 16 years ago is the end point of this claim, not the starting point. that is important to understand.
As for your point about it only being one dataset I’d dispute that but before I do I’d like to see what none-local datasets you believe show a statistically warming trend continuing for this period and a dataset that is considered from currently reliable measurement methods.
cjames says:
December 4, 2012 at 7:37 pm
I cannot believe the attacks on the poster named Nicole for stating a simple undeniable fact that Marc Morano has no science expertise. Also, I have seen him in action several times and I agree with nightwriter that he is “an aggressive, rude jerk”. That doesn’t mean that what he says about AGW is wrong, I just believe he does skeptics no favors with his debating skills…..
_______________________________________
It was an intentional AMBUSH. Skeptics have made enough noise so the media felt they had to provide a sound bite but they wanted one that made the Skeptics look like nut jobs.
Marc had the options of refusing to be interviewed, of being polite and silenced, or appearing as “an aggressive, rude jerk”. It was a real lose – lose – lose and it was done deliberately. The fact they chose Marc vs some one like Dr. Tim Ball, any number of other scientists, or even Anthony was also done deliberately.
cjames says:
December 4, 2012 at 7:37 pm
I cannot believe the attacks on the poster named Nicole for stating a simple undeniable fact that Marc Morano has no science expertise….
_________________________
So? I am no vet or doctor but I know when they are spouting crap. I have on more that one occasion caught a vet or a doctor telling real whoppers. If you have blind faith in doctors and do not do independent research you are an absolute idiot.
You do not have to have ANYTHING but the ability to read, do mathematics and reason to debate someone like Bill Nye. There are plenty of people on WUWT who could probable debate the guy into the ground.
Unfortunately, I missed the show, but Joe Bastardi live-tweeted. Here is what he said:
“Meteorologist Joe Bastardi Blasts Bill Nye and Piers Morgan for Their Global Warming Opinions”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/12/04/meteorologist-joe-bastardi-blasts-bill-nye-and-piers-morgan-their-glo#disqus_thread
salvatore del prete says:
December 5, 2012 at 7:41 am
“We will have much of the answer by decade end, because we have the prolong solar minimum which causes cooling versus co2 increases which suppose to cause warming. Let us see the temperature response…
If this turns out to be correct those of us who support solar as opposed to greenhouse gases as the main factor in determining the climate of the earth will be correct.”
Are you implying that an external energy source is needed to raise the planets temperature and the energy which the sun produces increases and decreases cyclically so therefore regulates our planets temperature? Could it be that perfect? (I say slightly Sarcastic)
Did You watch Bill Nye and Al Gore’s Incredible experiment where they filled a jar with Carbon Dioxide to millions of times above normal and exposed it to a heat lamp at a constant temperature, When the heat lamp was switched on the temperature went up and stopped.
Basically what you’re implying is that if they used a higher wattage heat lamp, the temperature too would increase and if they used a lower wattage heat lamp the temperature would decrease and that’s with CO2 at millions of times than earths atmosphere. Nice! 🙂
Anthony-
Thanks for the heads up on the show. I didn’t find the debate (?)- how about talking points thrown is as quickly as possible with no discussion at all- all that informative. The focus on the Precautionary Principle from the moderator- to help out Mr Nye- is getting a bit old for me as the painful discussion of the effectiveness our efforts towards mitigation is sorely lacking.
I wish Piers had followed up with Mr. Nye on his comment about electrical energy and energy storage.
Nye’s most impressive roles were on Stargate: Atlantis and in the Epcot “Ellen’s Energy Adventure” attraction. (He managed to be less annoying than Ellen Degeneres).
“Do you people go to your politicians for a medical? Why are you going to them for climate change issues?”
Do you go to lepidopterists for your population predictions?
The real shame is that Bill Nye is corrupting our youth with his unscientific dogma.
The TV science guy was Mr. Wizard (Don Herbert) when I was young. He seemed to know his stuff and was much more interesting than Nye. I don’t know what he thought of CAGW, but I think it likely he would have been a skeptic.
I knew Mr. Wizard from watching his TV show, and Bill Nye is no Mr. Wizard.
Nye denies global MWP, Roman or Minoan periods. Morano denies acceleration of sea level (untrue last 15 years vs prior 1950s or prior 1900s, but trivial).
Nye holds the temperature rise and CO2 correlation refllect causation. Morano says the correlation is not causation, certainly not significant causation.
The dispute between the two lies in Nye believing models forf the future and Morano, believing in the facts of the present without modeled progression. Nye believes that the past does not reflect the future, while Morano believes that the recent past is useful for projecting the future.
The moderator and Bill Nye consider economic damage in principle non-damaging, and the no-action-at-present to be catastrophic without recourse.
Nye vs Morano: the Precautionary Principle vs Pragmatism, the science status quo/authorities vs the science in progress and the Missouri State motto: Show Me.
Bill Bye sounded less like a scientist and more like a Jimmy Swaggart. Sad too. My kids loved his show. What happened to him? He forgot what science is all about. He is all PT. Barnum and Bailey and no substance.
Bill…. Science isn’t showmanship…. it is …. the application of the scientific method.
You, in defense of your ego, will do anything to defend your self image…. even tossing science under the bus in the process.
sad sad sad