Bill Nye: Millennials will Save Us from Climate Change

Bill Nye, Barack Obama, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson selfie
Bill Nye, Barack Obama, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson selfie

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

US Television Personality Bill Nye thinks the younger generation will save the world from Climate Change, by forcing the Republican Party to embrace climate narratives to win their vote. But there are a few factors Nye is overlooking.

“Don’t be surprised, after the conservatives, the Republicans, pick somebody, this person goes, well, I’ve been thinking about it and climate change is a big issue. Because I don’t think they can quite get enough — I don’t think the party can quite get enough votes without millennials. Climate denial is almost entirely generational. Only now and then do you meet a young person — nobody your age is a climate denier. Very few. It’s all old people.”

Read more:

Is there any evidence to back Nye’s claim that climate skepticism increases with age? The answer is yes – but the correlation is weak. Other factors such as political affiliation are stronger predictors of climate views – though the correlation between politics and climate views is not as strong as a lot of people assume.

Figure 1 from Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomesof belief in climate change, source Nature
Figure 1 from Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomesof belief in climate change, source Nature

It would be fascinating to see whether people who believe in dangerous anthropogenic climate change retain that belief as they age, or whether the demographic stays more or less stable. According to Gallup, there has been a slow rise in climate alarmism since 1997, which supports Bill’s assertion that millennials will shift the balance of concern about Climate Change.

A third key indicator of public concern about global warming is the percentage of U.S. adults who believe the phenomenon will eventually pose a serious threat to them or their way of life. Forty-one percent now say it will, up from 37% in 2015 and, by one point, the highest in Gallup's trend dating back to 1997.
A third key indicator of public concern about global warming is the percentage of U.S. adults who believe the phenomenon will eventually pose a serious threat to them or their way of life. Forty-one percent now say it will, up from 37% in 2015 and, by one point, the highest in Gallup’s trend dating back to 1997, source Gallup.

However, when asked to rate lists of concerns in order of priority, Climate Change consistently comes last. Young people who say they are concerned about climate change, generally don’t support taking action to combat climate change, when given other choices.


See for more information.

Is Bill Nye right, that climate will eventually force the capitulation of skeptical politicians to public climate concerns? In my opinion, the answer is that Bill Nye is wrong.

The evidence suggests that people care most about issues which affect them every day. Even if the younger generation retains their climate concerns, daily concerns about safety, financial security and that pothole at the end of the street which nobody has fixed will continue to trump the climate issue.

At most politicians will begin to pay more empty lip service to climate concerns, but even this is far from certain.

If you were to draw an age related demographic of belief in the tooth fairy, you would find tooth fairy skepticism is also correlated with age. Older people tend to see through the lies they were fed in their youth.

As long as WUWT and other skeptical organisations can continue to point out the flaws in alarmist narratives, skeptical messages will reach enough voters to at least defuse belief in the alleged urgency of the climate issue, so that expensive, socially and financially harmful policies designed to combat the imaginary climate threat will continue to be obstructed.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 6, 2016 6:25 pm

is this the guy that faked a greenhouse effect experiment on TV?

Reply to  chaamjamal
April 6, 2016 6:30 pm


Reply to  Menicholas
April 6, 2016 7:58 pm

Oh, it is SO much worse than that.
Not only did he fake the results, his apparatus and methodology displayed his complete ignorance of how the GHE works. He had the IR source outside the apparatus and shining in through the CO2 layer, instead of inside the apparatus shining out through the CO2 layer. As a result, the experiment could only show cooling where the goal was to show warming. So instead of trying to figure out what was wrong with their apparatus, they faked the results. I could see someone with a limited knowledge of the GHE making this mistake, but Bill Nye is both an engineer and “the science guy”.
Small victory for me, I said in comments that if the experiment was replicated and the actual results reported, the CO2 filled apparatus would show the opposite result that Bill Nye got. I offered to take a wager on it. A regular warmist commenter named R. Gates offered to take me up on it. We unfortunately never got to settle the exact terms of the wager (long story) but Anth_ny later replicated the experiment, and I was vindicated. I hounded R. Gates in this forum rather mercilessly over it, and he eventually stopped showing up.
Bill Nye on the other hand seems blissfully unaware that not only did he get caught faking results, but that he actually designed an experiment in such a manner as to demonstrate that he doesn’t have a clue how the GHE actually works.

Reply to  Menicholas
April 7, 2016 5:21 am

Bill Nye on the other hand seems blissfully unaware that not only did he get caught faking results…
Like so many of the loud leftist luminaries, no doubt his attitude is, “¯\_(ツ)_/¯ So what? I have demonstrated my eco-piety and compliance with those who can be dangerous to my career and have millions of fans. Eff you.”

Bryan A
Reply to  Menicholas
April 7, 2016 10:25 am

Judging solely by the quote used in the opening paragraph, It would appear that Mr Nye has difficulty expressing coherent thoughts beyond stringing together simple sentences of 7 words or less in an attempt to make more complex sentences that appear to Ramble. Kind of Pseudo Intellectual
“Don’t be surprised,
after the conservatives,
the Republicans,
pick somebody,
this person goes,
I’ve been thinking about it and climate change is a big issue.
Because I don’t think they can quite get enough —
I don’t think the party can quite get enough votes without millennials.
Climate denial is almost entirely generational.
Only now and then do you meet a young person —
nobody your age is a climate denier.
Very few.
It’s all old people.”

Bryan A
Reply to  Menicholas
April 7, 2016 10:30 am

Judging solely on the Quote in the opening paragraph, It would appear that Mr. Nye has trouble expressing himself beyond stringing together simple sentences of 7 words or less. Kind of Pseudo-Intellectual
“Don’t be surprised,
after the conservatives,
the Republicans,
pick somebody,
this person goes,
I’ve been thinking about it and climate change is a big issue.
Because I don’t think they can quite get enough —
I don’t think the party can quite get enough votes without millennials.
Climate denial is almost entirely generational.
Only now and then do you meet a young person —
nobody your age is a climate denier.
Very few.
It’s all old people.”

Reply to  chaamjamal
April 7, 2016 9:54 am

The sad thing is, he’s the smartest person in the picture.

April 6, 2016 6:37 pm

Considering how relentlessly, intensively, and insistently the younger generation has been indoctrinated in 12 years of schooling, complete with ‘you don’t want to be with the greedy, callous baby-killers‘ character assassination of skeptics, the fact of weak correlation of generation with climate alarm reflects an extraordinary failure of the AGW propaganda machine.

Reply to  Pat Frank
April 6, 2016 6:58 pm

Totally agree with you. I went back to college a few years ago (after taking 20 years off to work) and was shocked at how nakedly left-leaning it had become.

Reply to  Pat Frank
April 6, 2016 10:21 pm

Yes, I was also very surprised at the relatively weak age correlation reported. I would have bet it was stronger as Mr. Nye claimed.
I played a big role in my kids education and specifically in science, math and history. The indoctrination by the local public (government) schools was incessant. I’m still undoing some bogus ideas that actually stuck in my two kids, but making very nice progress at getting them to question and research what they are hearing. They are constantly surprised when I show them unambiguous data from credible sources (e.g. Sea Ice page, RSS/UAH satellite data, historical temperature data, severe weather trend data, etc.). Then I throw in facts about the absolute failure (cost vs utility) of “renewable” energy and the fact that the warming we have seen (appears to me to be mostly natural) is pretty much completely beneficial. They are almost completely convinced now and actually come and ask me what I think about various stories they read.
In spite of an indoctrination campaign towards the US youth that would make the North Korean government blush, it appears that the alarmists have largely failed. Once kids get out from under professors/teachers who will reduce their grades for opinions/papers that are not along alarmist party lines, it appears they actually can largely think critically.

Paul Mackey
Reply to  Pat Frank
April 7, 2016 3:25 am

It might also be that older people like me can remember teh climate 40 years ago, and know it hasn’t changed that much……….

Doug Bunge
Reply to  Pat Frank
April 7, 2016 5:18 am

That is exactly the reason. Repeat a lie often enough……..

Mike Maguire
Reply to  Pat Frank
April 7, 2016 7:27 am

Indoctrination is a good way to put it Pat. I’m chess coach at 4 local schools and know most of the science teachers there. As an independent operational meteorologist, I also have had discussions with them on weather and climate. In addition I have 2 grandchildren at one of the schools.
They are all outstanding teachers(we live in a great school district) and some I consider friends so I hate to knock anything. However, when CO2=pollution is being taught vs CO2=beneficial gas and part of: Sun +H2O +CO2 +Minerals = O2 +Sugars(food) then you can understand how our young people come out with a different “perceived” understanding of what carbon dioxide is and does.
Ironically, if they were being taught meteorology 101, they would learn that increasing the temperature of the highest latitudes, decreases the meridional temperature gradient and decreases many measures of extreme weather……..but are being taught instead, that extreme weather/climate is increasing.
And the observational evidence supports this. Conditions for life on this (greening up) planet have been the best in almost 1,000 years(since the Medieval Warm Period that was warmer than this in many places).
Life on earth faces great adversity when temperatures are colder than this. Most life does better at these temperatures or warmer.
This authentic science is not being taught to our children…………as it was to us older folks, Once you think you know something, your brain interprets all new information differently related to that, than it did before you “learned” it.
If it confirms what you think that you know……… gets stored as knowledge and strengthens your belief system. If it contradicts what you think you know…………it gets rejected.
These young people are graduating with a scientific belief system about CO2 that really is an indoctrination/brainwashing based on politics, not authentic science.
When I present the facts above, with supporting evidence to a well educated, indoctrinated young person, they are usually speechless. Afterwards, they just go back to their belief system. What does this tell you?
Just imagine this fact: The increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280 ppm to 400 ppm has actually rescued life on this planet from dangerously low levels of carbon dioxide.
How can a mind brainwashed with CO2=pollution comprehend such a thing?

Reply to  Pat Frank
April 7, 2016 7:40 am

It just goes to show where a lack of critical thinking skills will lead you.

Get Real
Reply to  Pat Frank
April 9, 2016 6:00 am

Indoctrinated? More like marinated.

April 6, 2016 6:38 pm

I am too old to have watched Nye on TV.
But he is just a media personality. He has been in evolution/creation debates, and barely throws anything out there that is beyond the evolution science equivalent of “97% of scientists.”
If kids these days are persuaded by this guy, things are pretty bad.

Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
April 6, 2016 6:59 pm

Millenials also believe Bernie Sanders will give them all lollipops.

Reply to  Goldrider
April 7, 2016 5:25 am

And also that Justin Trudeau will legalize pot in Canada.

Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
April 6, 2016 7:25 pm

Kids are easily persuaded – Look at these Traumatized Snowflakes as one example at our colleges:

Reply to  kokoda
April 6, 2016 9:26 pm

They look like they are WORSHIPPING trump.
All crowding around his very name. !

Patrick MJD
Reply to  kokoda
April 7, 2016 12:25 am

But where I am from in England, a “trump” is a fart (Passing gas/wind for my American/Canadian cousins). So these people like to congregate around a fart? Strange!

Alan the Brit
Reply to  kokoda
April 7, 2016 3:08 am

As a 58 year old Englishman, I have never heard of the term “Trump” to refer to a fart/break-wind! A fart is a fart where I hail from! I may not agree with some or much of what Trump says, but then again, it’s none of my damned business what America decides in its politics!

Reply to  kokoda
April 7, 2016 5:56 am

a “trump” is a fart
I have never heard
maybe you are thinking of pharump, a fart made in the bathtub.

Edmonton Al
Reply to  kokoda
April 7, 2016 6:09 am

I am a Canadian of English parents. They always referred to passing wind as a trump. We kids always said farts.

Reply to  kokoda
April 7, 2016 2:50 pm
Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
April 6, 2016 9:16 pm

If it’s any consolation, I have a daughter who just completed her science degree last year – I’m in Oz.
I’ve tried her out on the whole AGW debate and she just gives me one of her raised eyebrow “dad joke” looks.
I think I’m safe.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Raven
April 6, 2016 9:49 pm

Congratulations, Raven! Truly, happy for you. She’s okay! (whew — that was a long 22 + years, huh? — way to go, Dad)… things are just going to get better for you two from here on out 🙂

Doug Bunge
Reply to  Raven
April 7, 2016 5:17 am

A few months ago I was having a discussion with my much younger brother (he’s 29) about AGW and he started blabbing about these smart guys he watched on YouTube explaining the whys and hows of AGW (he was a believer). Then, just a few days ago he came up to me and said “Apparently we are coming out of a small ice age.” I just said “Yeah, I know.”

Edmonton Al
Reply to  Raven
April 7, 2016 6:14 am

Ask her to watch the new Climate Hustle movie………………

Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
April 6, 2016 11:07 pm

Thanks Janice,
I think she’ll be fine.
But if my kids and their groups of friends are any guide, I don’t think any of them are much concerned about the AGW debate or even politics more broadly.
It seems likely to me that the younger generation initially take their political leanings from their parents. My daughter probably leans to the left while my 26 year old son is an out and out capitalist. My eldest daughter produced three children within two years (set of twins) so obviously she hasn’t got time to keep up with navel-gazers like Bill Nye. lol

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Raven
April 7, 2016 3:09 am

Aren’t daughter’s just fabulous? Never won an argument with mine yet, probably never will!

April 6, 2016 6:38 pm

None of the skeptical politicians will do the thing that is absolutely necessary: Take on the hoax head-on and smash it into dust. Even Tony Abbott, when announcing his policy to remove the carbon tax, didn’t do this. It was: “Oh, if you don’t believe, then this is good, and if you do believe, well, we’re planting trees, and that’s good.” Absolutely refute it. In fact, stop this “skeptic” nonsense. We KNOW it is a disproven load of rubbish. Start calling ourselves realists, or refuters – but not merely skeptics, even though that is good, the evidence leaves an ambivalent position as untenable as belief in the BS.

Phil's Dad
Reply to  Ron House
April 6, 2016 9:52 pm

Now get yourself elected Ron

Reply to  Ron House
April 7, 2016 5:49 am

Yes, I’m still waiting for any of the Presidential candidates here in the USA to unequivocally declare that CAGW is a hoax and promise to tear down the Federal money pipeline to ‘climate science’ and ‘renewable energy’.
There’s a good chance that Ted Cruz will, though. He called the hearing he held in the Senate “Data or Dogma?” and invited John Christy, Mark Steyn, and Judith Curry to testify.
/Mr Lynn

Reply to  L. E. Joiner
April 7, 2016 7:33 am

Cruz actually understands the science, which is rare on either side of the aisle.

Reply to  L. E. Joiner
April 7, 2016 8:59 am

Yes, I think if any nation is going to call out the the CAGW farce for what it is, likely the USA will be the one to do it.
Once that happens, the rest of the world will more easily follow.
There’s life in the good ol’ US of A yet.

Tom Halla
April 6, 2016 6:41 pm

I think it takes a few failed predictions of doom to develop skepticism (it did in my case).

April 6, 2016 6:43 pm

He’s the “science guy” but he’s not a scientist. Probably never heard of the Navier Stokes equations.

Reply to  jack
April 6, 2016 10:29 pm

His college education appears to be a BS Mech Engr from Cornell, then show biz all the way down. Even that modest amount of education for the “science guy” appears have been beyond his science IQ.
I lived in the Seattle area for a number of years in his heyday so I suffered through a lot of his BS (ME) knowledge.

Jay Hope
Reply to  jack
April 7, 2016 12:54 am

I often wonder about the popular ‘scientists’ in the UK. People like Brian Cox. Are they really scientists, or just puppets for the media?

Edmonton Al
Reply to  Jay Hope
April 7, 2016 6:29 am

Puppets that get paid more than they could make as a scientist.
They are a disgrace to the profession. Suzuki is another one.

April 6, 2016 6:49 pm

3 dopes who don’t even know what a planet is.

Rob Morrow
Reply to  vounaki
April 6, 2016 7:07 pm

1 criminal and 2 media whores.

F. Ross
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 9:09 pm

Photo makes me wanna {excuse the expression} puke.

Reply to  vounaki
April 6, 2016 9:28 pm

The “selfie” generation. !!

Bryan A
Reply to  AndyG55
April 8, 2016 2:21 pm

I like how Nye’s thumb and forefinger make a modified “L” shape above their heads

April 6, 2016 7:10 pm

The new “Trudeau” is already under the attack of the “Warmists”. Article in today’s Tyee news rag in Vancouver BC
There was this article with some statements from Oreskes,

Reply to  asybot
April 7, 2016 10:36 am

CBC News | British Columbia, Nov.7, 2015
‘Analysis | Oil Companies and climate change: Who should pay?’
Note Greenpeace!
Possible plans to sue oil companies over climate change? Using tobacco legal means.

michael hart
April 6, 2016 7:21 pm

“Only now and then do you meet a young person — nobody your age is a climate denier. Very few. It’s all old people.”-Bill Nye

Bill Nye is 60 years old. I’m still younger than him, and I think he is a penis-brain.
I’m not sure what he thinks I might be denying here, but I’ll deny it anyway if it keeps him happy in his dotage.

Reply to  michael hart
April 7, 2016 5:31 am

He’s pandering. Media idiots, advertisers/marketers and politicians are great at that. It’s pretty pathetic.

April 6, 2016 7:36 pm

i have many friends that have forgotten more science than the science guy knows!

Eugene WR Gallun
April 6, 2016 7:43 pm

“Climate change is almost entirely generational.”
Millennials, after devastating revelations about the non-existence of the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, are desperate for something to believe in. Socialism (and its unearned bounty) is the new replacement. And Socialism has the big plus of allowing Millennials to righteously rebel against their parents and the evil world their parents created.
Climate change is the horse that Socialism is trying to ride in on. At parties climate change goes good with drugs and alcohol. It is uber-cool. Was I ever young?
Eugene WR Gallun

Reply to  Eugene WR Gallun
April 6, 2016 9:21 pm

“Climate change is almost entirely generational.”

Indeed. Just look at all the grant money it generates. 😉

Caligula Jones
April 6, 2016 7:49 pm

The problem with millennials (and my son is 25, I know if what I speak) is that they are a bit…flighty.
I mean, they used Facebook and YouTube then abandoned them for Instagram and Vine, started with Twitter than moved on to the Next Kewl Thing.
I imagine that, like getting their first real paycheck when more than a third is taken off, they’ll cool when they realize who will actually be paying all those super necessary but painful carbon taxes. Hint: it ain’t gonna be gramma and grampa, their gone to their just rewards.

Reply to  Caligula Jones
April 6, 2016 8:15 pm

CJ – couldn’t agree more. “Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.”

Reply to  canabianblog
April 6, 2016 8:16 pm

CJ – couldn’t agree more. “Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.” (stupid WP)

Reply to  canabianblog
April 7, 2016 10:58 am

EcoWatch, April 6, 2016
”7-Year-old Files Climate Change Lawsuit with Supreme Court of Pakistan’
Youth legal movement now includes Canada.
Scroll down to: Roger Cox, attorney for URGENDA, and lead attorney for “The Dutch Case”. And now Sr. Fellow at CIGI, Waterloo, ON, Canada., and click on the “Name”
CIGI Founder and Chair. Jim Balsallie.
INET/Institute for New Economic Thinking, New York City, founded by Jim Balsallie, George Soros and Wm.Janeway.
Millennials now involved in climate change litigation as there are other climate change cases in other places in the world.
Look out Canada!

Reply to  canabianblog
April 7, 2016 11:02 am
Reply to  canabianblog
April 7, 2016 12:38 pm

IUCNAEL Colloquium 2016, Oslo
Side event presented by CIGI: “Side-Event: Limiting Dangerous Climate change: The Emerging Importance of Domestic Courts and Human Rights Tribunals – Especially After Paris”
IUCNAEL Secretariat located:
University of Ottawa Faculty of Law
Ottawa, ON, Canada

Dave in Canmore
Reply to  Caligula Jones
April 7, 2016 7:50 am

Agreed Caligula Jones! Millennials experience with changing anything mostly involves clicks, reposts and re-tweets. When it comes to actually putting their money where their mouth is, watch the self-righteousness fade to obscurity. My only optimism with the latest version of group stupidity is that every generation becomes more hypocritical than the last!
It’s easy for millennials to support the climate narrative when all you have to do is agree with everyone and you are thought to be “saving the world.” It’s much harder to support it when it reduces your standard of living.

Reply to  Dave in Canmore
April 9, 2016 12:07 am

We millennials have you old people to thank for our indoctrination programs, starting with university departments of education in the 1970s and 1980s! Stinkin’ hippies rebelled against the man, became the man, and now we’re witnessing the culmination of the program. My grandfather’s might’ve been the greatest generation (he lied about his age so he could join the Navy early and fight the Japanese in WWII), but the next generation hasn’t convinced me yet that mine is the worst. At least in Iraq and Afghanistan, everybody to my left and right volunteered to be there.
Just a little something to think about. 🙂

Reply to  Caligula Jones
April 7, 2016 9:28 am

They have to get a job before they can get a paycheck.

Reply to  Taphonomic
April 7, 2016 12:16 pm

Well, there’s that, of course. And they would have to unplug their video games and stop binge watching to get a job.

Reply to  Caligula Jones
April 7, 2016 12:21 pm

Barbara April 7, 2016 at 10:58 am
EcoWatch, April 6, 2016
”7-Year-old Files Climate Change Lawsuit with Supreme Court of Pakistan’
Just re-reading “1984” and one of the more chilling aspects was that Big Brother knew that once you have the children indoctrinated, you have society. The little brats become the most militant (as we also see with religious fundamentalists) and they know no other life.
BTW, my son and I share the same “luke warmer” belief, so I won a small battle there. Had some interesting discussions at parent/teacher night, though…

Reply to  CaligulaJones
April 7, 2016 2:56 pm

“The little brats become the most militant (as we also see with religious fundamentalists)…”
I don’t see a lot of militant Christians . . so., maybe, just maybe, you’ve been indoctrinated by the same propaganda machine, to parrot such things without serious thought. Jesus and militancy don’t go real well together, obviously, but could one have been trained to think/speak as though all religions are equivalent . . and all advocacy is militancy, etc, I ask the reader to consider seriously . . rather than assume this propaganda stuff is some sort of recent trend/development.

April 6, 2016 7:54 pm

There might be a correlation between age and belief, but I suspect it is a side effect of a real correlation between belief and exposure to formal educational institutions. I would suggest that the longer a person has been separated from indoctrination, the more sceptical they become. So many millenials have no idea what the real world involves.

April 6, 2016 7:55 pm

It’s just human nature to not be concerned about some distant possibly unpleasant event that might impact your life or the lives of future generations. In spite of the overwhelming evidence that smoking is harmful to your health, young people continue to take up the habit because the unpleasant consequences are distant and not certain whereas the pleasure is now, real and certain. In my own case, I’m an octogenerian, so even if global warming proves to be catastrophic, it won’t impact me unless I live to be 180. In any case, past generations didn’t give a hoot about me, so why should I worry about future generations? Just asking.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Trebla
April 6, 2016 8:28 pm

Indeed, Trebla. The D.A.R.E. anti-drug program was thoughtfully designed and enthusiastically taught – for YEARS. The kids still do drugs and still smoke. I asked a 14-year-old awhile back why he thought the D.A.R.E. program which his classmates had been exposed to since they were in KINDERGARTEN was not working. His answer was, essentially: “The kids who are going to do drugs are going to do them anyway; the kids who weren’t going to didn’t need the program to stop them.”
IOW: Take heart! All that AGW propaganda will not change basic human nature: i.e., “What’s in it for me?”
Show them the money aspect to it, and the largely career-focused, give-me-the facts, suspicious-of-all-sales-gimmicks, millennials will choose what smart money does. Except for the few who can get in on their parents’ wind and solar sc@ms, they will NOT want their tax/rate surcharge money “invested” in “renewables.”
Al Gore, et. al. are to U.S. millenials as Ward Cleever (of “Leave It to Beaver” infamy) was to their parents…

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 6, 2016 10:20 pm

“How would you like to sit through a whole presentation on global warming?” Al Gore bellowed, immediately following through on his threat, slaying his opponent.
“South Park”
Millennial thinking about global warming. 

SUPER cereal.

Janice Moore
April 6, 2016 7:59 pm

“There is no official age range for millennials but the generation generally is defined as being born between the early 1980s and early 2000s. … Nathan Lipsky, 23, exhibits many characteristics of his generation that are prompting upheaval in numerous industries. Though he earns a good salary in a job in the financial services industry in Kansas City, Mo., Mr. Lipsky said buying a house and getting married were not on his radar for the near future. ‘Right now it’s purely career-focused,’ said Mr. Lipsky, who lives with his parents. ‘This is a very selfish time in life.’ … young adults are proving particularly baffling to marketers and researchers. … Young adults, the study found, need a lot of reassurance but don’t like to be marketed to.
‘No one truly understand millennials,’ the researchers summarized. ‘Not even millennials.'”
(Source: )
1. They are NOT likely to be into “saving the planet.”
2. They are sales-resistant.
3. They lack self-confidence or decisiveness.
Give them the facts about human CO2 emissions
in simple, accurate, powerful, language.
For instance:
Game over.”
2) “Windpower is killing raptors for: NOTHING. No net gain. Permanently negative ROI {insert basics about bearing failure and lubricant tech not there}.”
3) “Solar power for an entire economy is ‘let’s play pretend’.” {use Ozzie Zehner or Zehner-type presentation — in summary form}
Q: Did you notice who IS concerned (sort of, heh) about glooohhhbul warming?
A: The millenials’ PARENTS. LOL — AGW is history.

Rob Morrow
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 6, 2016 8:31 pm

Janice, I admire your optimism. Here’s how I see it:
1. They are NOT likely to be into “saving the planet.” because they are selfish. They’ve been brought up to believe that the world runs on their feelings.
2. They are sales-resistant because they are all “too cool for school” and have no attention span.
3. They lack self-confidence or decisiveness because they were born into the internet age and they don’t know how to distinguish truth from untruth. They lack critical thinking skills.
So who will millennials vote for? The loudest shrillest party, the one telling the kids that they will be morally virtuous for voting [Dem], or evil bigots if they vote for the other guy. The right isn’t cool, loud, or entitled. I bet Millennials will mostly vote left and perpetuate the CAGW heist unless there is some watershed event an order of magnitude greater than ClimateGate. Continuing divergence between CAGW and observation is immaterial to the narrative because Millennials, just like their parents, are mostly scientifically illiterate and will believe whatever their political tribe tells them to believe.

Rob Morrow
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 8:35 pm

Bill Nye is probably “correct” that the Millennial generation will be the champions of CAGW, insofar as they been sufficiently indoctrinated to vote a particular way.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 8:56 pm

Remember, however, Mr. Morrow, that “the loudest shrillest” (in the U.S., that’s the Democrats) will be a MAJOR turn-off to millenials. They are known for being (check out professional seminars such as one I attended where the baby boomers and Gen X’s are being told how to “relate” to millenials — they are VERY suspicious of “shrill and loud” promotion). They may VOTE for Democrats for other, uninformed, reasons, but “climate change” will not be one of them.
Having Bill Nye, “The Science Guy” tell these 20 and 30-somethings to “save the planet” is like Ronald McDonald talking to them. They will just laugh and change the channel.
The millennials are not as easily led as their parents. Which is, of course, both good and bad. With regard to AGW it is GREAT! 🙂
Give them the facts. In a text.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 8:58 pm

Nye dresses like Pee Wee Herman, for Pete’s sake! lol
(yes, I misspelled millennials at least twice, Brian H)

Rob Morrow
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 9:18 pm

I agree with you 100% that CAGW sound bites probably bore millennials to the point of tuning out, except that tuning out simply isn’t good enough. The CAGW scare has been forced fed to them through media and school for their whole lives, and they don’t have the inclination or the tools to refute it. I figure scientific apathy, and apathy in general, is the Dems’ best friend. And while other issues may be more important to voters, the CAGW meme will not be decoupled from big government politics (Dems) unless there is a compelling for them reason to do so.

Give them the facts. In a text.

If only we skeptics could refute CAGW in 140 characters!
PS Janice thanks for trying to dissuade me from my pessimism.

Rob Morrow
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 9:19 pm

If we’re lucky Nye will be discredited after he’s caught jacking off in a theater.

Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 9:37 pm

“Give them the facts. In a text.”

Haha . . I reckon that captures it for the young’ns.
Now if they could just condense AR5 into 140 characters . . .

Game over.

36 characters.
There’s even room for:

Have a nice day

Janice Moore
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 10:28 pm

P.S. Rob Morrow, you are so very welcome! Cheerleading is my specialty! (sorry if it is annoying at times, too — can’t help myself 🙂 ) Thanks for being such a good sport about it. Goooo, Rob!

Rob Morrow
Reply to  Rob Morrow
April 6, 2016 10:45 pm

Lol thanks for calling me a good sport for being a curmudgeon 😉

Christopher Paino
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 7, 2016 1:16 pm

“Young adults, the study found, need a lot of reassurance but don’t like to be marketed to.”
Young people today wouldn’t know they were being marketed to if they did the marketing themselves. And where are you getting sales-resistance from? Young “adults” today are complete sheep. That’s why Nick Cannon and Dr. Dre can sell “audiophile” headphones that sound like tin cans for $100s each and think they are marketing geniuses.

William H Partin
April 6, 2016 8:01 pm

Has Nye ever been right about anything?

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  William H Partin
April 6, 2016 11:17 pm

Once upon a time the made a statement and realized he was wrong. He was right.

Johann Wundersamer
April 6, 2016 8:01 pm

The author is optimistic. New research shows that most of the world’s energy needs can be met with existing renewable technologies.
But it will take political power to make it happen, Oreskes said. And a political program more in tune with climate realities than an ‘all of the above’ approach.
Mychaylo Prystupa is a veteran journalist with a focus on energy and politics. Find his stories for The Tyee here.
The author is optimistic. New research shows that most of the world’s energy needs can be met with existing renewable technologies.
Yes, one by one :
1 vacuums
2 microwave
3 TV Set
4 remote control
5 garage door

Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
April 6, 2016 8:24 pm

JW – “The Tyee is a left-wing independent online Canadian news magazine that primarily covers British Columbia.” Started by a journalist who was fired for his “independent” thinking. Their bent is not surprising.

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
April 6, 2016 8:42 pm

Johann Wundersamer — Hahaha, got to love your reply. — Eugene WR Gallun

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
April 6, 2016 9:11 pm

EWR /:-》

Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
April 7, 2016 6:30 am

New research shows that most of the world’s energy needs can be met with existing renewable technologies.
only one small problem, we can’t pay for them.
the ex-soviet union should stand as a stark warning to anyone that thinks politics can trump economics in the long run. bad policies lead to debt for those countries that follow them. and over time debt has crushed many more empires than war has ever done.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  ferdberple
April 7, 2016 2:02 pm

True, but people need to eat in the short run. It took 70 years for the Soviet Union to collapse, long enough for a lot of people to starve and a lot of other people to die in gulags for pointing out that the system wasn’t working. The current champion basket case which will fail in the long run is North Korea, followed by Zimbabwe. But by the time that happens there will be a lot fewer people around to say “I told you so”.

Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
April 7, 2016 6:39 am

New research? Fortunately we have new history to laugh at it. See

April 6, 2016 8:11 pm

I think that somehow the survey perhaps did not capture the essence of the attitudes of the younger generation. In my experience, the millennials and the younger follow-on crowd believe CAGW as a fact of life. It is simply because that is exactly what they have been taught in the schools from their earliest days. Further, they have been taught the CAGW line consistently, and with absolutely no doubt or alternate points of view. They certainly are never presented with any hard data which does not agree with the polemic. Objectively, they have no reason to doubt the reality of CAGW, so they do not. Now, they will say “climate change” because that is the common expression now. Make no mistake, they mean CAGW.
Now the survey asks about various options, and gives choices. Food, clothing, and shelter come first (as it were), no surprises there. The existence of more pressing concerns should not be misconstrued as a lack of interest. In my opinion, the younger generations are fully indoctrinated in CAGW and can be depended on to march to the tune of that drummer.

April 6, 2016 8:14 pm

The chart from the Nature study is an international comparison. “Twenty-seven variables were examined by synthesizing 25 polls and 171 academic studies across 56 nations.” I could be the correlation between age and acceptance is mainstream climate science is stronger in the U.S. than that chart indicates. The full study is paywalled so I do not known if they separated out U.S. data elsewhere in the study.

April 6, 2016 8:17 pm

He may be correct as apathy is more effective than activism.

Snarling Dolphin
April 6, 2016 8:20 pm

If only Bill Nye trusted young people to make their own decisions regarding climate change. I do.

Reply to  Snarling Dolphin
April 6, 2016 8:26 pm

Snarling – when it gets cold or an obvious reason for the current warming is uncovered, they may go back to studying science instead of “humanities”.

April 6, 2016 8:24 pm

This Pew study supports the claim that age plays a significant role in predicting belief that humans are causing global warming. It does not however report a correlation coefficient.
Only 31% of people over 65 accept mainstream climate science, while 60% of people between 18 to 29 do.

Reply to  Felix
April 6, 2016 8:36 pm

Felix – consider that “teachers” are suggesting that young people don’t need algebra, good grammar, history, and a host of other important developmental tools. They need the freedom to discover. In time they will. Remember, that a lot of the 18 to 29 group have not completed their “education” yet, be it in the school of hard knocks, a trade, college or university. For any that go on to get multiple degrees, or change fields, they won’t get things figured out until they are close to 40, after they have worked for a while and found out what life is really all about. So then, they will be the folks wandering why their children don’t believe in “Global Cooling” caused by giant fans erected by their forefathers 😉 (kidding) – assuming that happens in the next 20 years or so.

Eugene WR Gallun
April 6, 2016 8:30 pm

Concerning the picture, I could make jokes about the three stooges but that is too easy. And DeGrasse deserves a bit better. None of those three have any scientific accomplishments. All three rose through public relations. But DeGrasse, when he sticks to his field knows his stuff. Nye teaches science to children (which, upon occasion, he gets wrong). If asked O’Bummer would have difficulty locating the earth (point down, stupid).
But all believe (or at least claim to believe) in the future devastation of the earth due to climate change. DeGrasse has said — When the polar ice caps melt the ocean will rise up to the Statue Of Liberty’s elbow”. (Yes, he said “when”.)
So I judge them not to be the three stooges (Nye a possible exception) but three venal men seduced by personal ambition.
Eugene WR Gallun

Evan Jones
Reply to  Eugene WR Gallun
April 7, 2016 3:40 am

Deconstructing the Stooges: Three guys set adrift by the depression (Curly made his first appearance in 1932). Not competent, of course, and unskilled, but can-do, optimistic, and in there, pitching, always with a new scheme to improve their lot in life. The interplay between Curly and Moe is forcibly analogously reminiscent of youthful internet back and forth.
They exemplify Teddy Roosevelt’s admonition that if anyone asks you if you can do a job, say hell, yes — then find out how to do it.
If we had more of their sort, it would be a better world, I think.

Reply to  Eugene WR Gallun
April 7, 2016 9:59 am

My first thought was … Where’s Schemp?
I don’t think I have watched any more than a few minutes of any Stooges clip, but wasn’t Larry the leader (and fairly competent at times)?
Give three guys in the photo ladder, a couple buckets of paint, some scaffolding to assemble on a slight slope, tell them to paint the second story windows (trim) of your house, and see what would happen.

Reply to  DonM
April 7, 2016 8:20 pm

April 7, 2016 at 9:59 am wrote:
“My first thought was … Where’s Schemp?
I don’t think I have watched any more than a few minutes of any Stooges clip, but wasn’t Larry the leader (and fairly competent at times)?”
Moe was the leader (not very competent, although he thought of himself as such), and Larry and Curly were the followers. Shemp replaced Curly after Curly passed away.
I used to come home from elementary school every day, way back when (1950’s), and watch the “Three Stooges”. They were hilarious to this kid. When you get to be an adult, they are a little less hilarious, probably because it is so predictable by then, but still funny.
We have a six-year-old boy and a 12-year-old boy who currently find the Three Stooges very hilarious, and insist on watching them a lot, so I have ended up watching a lot of this series lately. 🙂

Reply to  Eugene WR Gallun
April 7, 2016 11:39 am

DeGrasse Tyson is one of the bunch. He has swallowed whole the cagw myth.

April 6, 2016 8:39 pm

Lincoln’s aphorism about fooling some of the people all the time, all the people some of the time, but not all the people all the time is appropriate. Every generation has been complained about as an utter loss or “out of it” by the next older generation I suspect. Kids, no matter how respectful or disrespectful, think their parents generation have “lost touch” or don’t get it. What saves us over time is that we aspire to know and tell the truth and even the CAGW crowd with some noble cause corruption know that in the end only the truth will do. As to the politics now there you have lying all around

April 6, 2016 8:57 pm

As a boomer, I note that a lot of the discussion about the attitude of millenials to CAGW is driven by the difference in their education, but there is a far more practical difference. We have live a much longer climate experience. Hell, in my youth you couldn’t drive a car in the middle of summer without taking a bucket of water and a towel to cool down the interior surfaces. It just ain’t that hot, despite what the headlines are trying to convince us of?

Bruce Russell
April 6, 2016 9:01 pm

Sooner or later even Millennials will want more proof than overshooting computer models.

April 6, 2016 9:04 pm

“Some old people” were actually taught valid science and remember most of it. Some of us are not sheeple. Some of us also know that most if not all politicians are not to be trusted. Some of us older people understand human nature and the weak character of those who seek power over others. Some of us have valid, functioning BS filters. And some of us are willing to point out the lies and evil agendas

April 6, 2016 9:17 pm
Janice Moore
Reply to  Alex
April 6, 2016 9:43 pm

Words. Just words. (above)
Millennial DOING:
“I Don’t Wanna Grow Up” — Chevy Camaro

(check out the end — glance at the house and… — just like the NY Times article I posted above told us)
Taking care of the planet was already taken care of — by mom and dad (not that AGW was ever a real problem, but that would be the mentality, here). Yay! On to BIGGER AND BETTER THINGS! Like driving a GAS-powered car and making money (and don’t you try to dip into my pocket, Big Wind and Sneaky Solar).

Reply to  Janice Moore
April 6, 2016 10:13 pm

Just for you Janice.
Some people buy muscle cars.
And some people build their own.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 6, 2016 10:25 pm

Thanks, davidmhoffer (see, I remembered to squishitalltogetherlikeyouorderedmeto) 🙂 .
That was pitiful — passed by a Golf. Well, good for the Golf-that-can-go. Talk about a sleeper…
As long as the earth endures, there will be: motorheads and gearheads who are into LIBERTY!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 7, 2016 12:01 am

Remember the Golf Mk.1 (I assume a GTI) was built in a time before massive increases in emission controls. The Golf Mk. 1 is HUGELY lighter than the Golf Mk. 6 GTI. So no surprise there IMO.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 7, 2016 12:05 am

I am not surprised the Golf beat the Nissan (It is a Datsun after all), but I suspect the Porche 911 GT3 probably wasn’t being pushed that hard IMO (Driven the Porche Carrera S4. Dealer in the UK in Swindon let me borrow one. I dropped off my LandRover Discovery COVERED in mud. I was wearing my boots. I had to drive the Porche home in my socks).

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 7, 2016 12:10 am

Janice, cars like that are fine, until they get to a bend in the road (Heh! Tongue in cheek). Would be great on the nullarbor here in Aus which is about 1100kms long and straight!

Reply to  Janice Moore
April 7, 2016 2:33 am

Yeah yeah.
I once had a Triumph Herald. The Herald was the Triumph family car. Same frame and drive train as the Triumph Spitfire but with a bread box for a body, less expensive heads on the engine and missing 30-40HP.
My top speed was 63mph (101kph), only it took me over a mile of flat, or better, slightly downhill road to reach that speed.
The only way I could safely enter and merge into Interstate roads, even with tricky Dick’s 55mph max speeds, was by never slowing down!
The great thing about Triumph Spitfires and Heralds back then was that they could take almost any curve at top speed.
One did need to show some sanity though. Technically, I could turn my steering wheel enough so that my Herald would do a doughnut in place. Perhaps better described as pulling a U-turn within a sidewalk. Turning the wheel that far at speed not only ruins front end alignments, it can pop tires off rims and roll the car. Not good in a convertible.
Back to interstates; I used to floor the Herald whenever approaching an interstate entrance or turnpike. And I’d keep that pedal floored, scooting around slow pokes until I was on the road and in the right lane, (slowest drivers).
Pulling that interstate entrance, it’s easy to seem like one is blowing past Vettes, Porches, Lamborghinis and Z cars. The truth is those cars aren’t even trying.
The same goes for goofballs who don’t mind forcing pea shell cars way over the speed limits just so they can appear to blow by real cars. All of the fake moves, fancy low wall tires and plastic spoilers still doesn’t make them a real car.
As the video clearly demonstrated, those cars easily overtook the pea shell, just by goosing a little gas into the engine.
There is a large shopping center nearby where I live. For over a decade, tiny car aficionados have been meeting over there and showing off their toys with all the glitz they’ve installed. Every now and then a challenge is issued, spotters are posted and a few tiny cars stage a drag race.
As only tiny cars with miniscule engines can drag race. It sure makes for a looong quarter mile with noisy mosquito like buzz machines. whrhrnnng.shiff.. whrhrnnng shff whrhrnnnggggg.
Be still, my beating heart…
Oh for the days when cars rumbled to life and one could feel the idle growl waiting to roar.
Few cars can truly challenge a hot bike at any speed. A quick twist of the throttle and the bike flashes by on one wheel. But no one cares about zipping past pea shells with dorky guys driving them. Perhaps if a foxy redhead lady was driving, but then we’d only zip up to the window and grin.
A few years ago, the police really bore down on the tiny car racers after one race went bad. In the center of the shopping center, the main road takes a slow curve and one of the racers lost control, hopping the median and rolling across the oncoming traffic. Even though the oncoming traffic speed was only 35mph, the inhabitants of the rolled car did not survive their ride.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Janice Moore
April 8, 2016 12:20 am

“ATheoK April 7, 2016 at 2:33 am”
A Herald? I had the GT6, awesome (Same frame as the Herald and Spitfire, but with that great 2ltr 6 engine. Mine was fitted with the 2.5ltr 6). Triumph’s were styled by an Italian, build by the British. So while they looked great, they rusted and fell apart as soon as you drove off the forecourt! LMAO!

Janice Moore
Reply to  Alex
April 6, 2016 9:52 pm

Re: “lamebook” graphic above – that cute young woman could be the avatar for someone much older, possibly, with a much deeper voice, too… with gray hair, likely…

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Alex
April 6, 2016 10:02 pm

super computers will heal it by adding bright colors to every modelled grid cell –
new enhanced!

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
April 6, 2016 10:06 pm

Alex on April 6, 2016 at 9:17 pm
millennial thinking
super computers will heal it by adding bright colors to every modelled grid cell –
new enhanced!
Thanks , Alex!

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
April 6, 2016 10:16 pm

Maybe you can repost your comment with the bevor / after
1 your Screenshot
2 a Screenshot of the enhanced super modelled Planet
have fun

Janice Moore
Reply to  Alex
April 6, 2016 10:31 pm

It is a good example. I’m am just convinced that it is an example of a minority view.
Thanks for sharing.
Your WUWT friend (whether you want her or not, heh),

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Alex
April 6, 2016 11:48 pm

And they cant see it is a fake picture? I mean north America is quite a bit larger in the second image.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
April 6, 2016 11:58 pm

and pasted over the moon

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Patrick MJD
April 7, 2016 12:13 am

I should wear my glasses more often. I thought that was a “polluted” image of the atmosphere at first. Serial, and I mean I am as serial as Al, these people are serial silly.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
April 7, 2016 2:43 am

A little worse than that Patrick. The image of the USA is from a 2D map graphic, not from a space camera or any sort of elevated picture.
The photo shoppers don’t even use real planet parts.

Reply to  Alex
April 7, 2016 11:36 am

Geez! We have turned the Western hemisphere into the Eastern!!

April 6, 2016 9:32 pm

Has anyone on here ever met someone who denies climate ?

April 6, 2016 9:33 pm

[snip – policy violation – despicable comment -mod]

Reply to  601nan
April 6, 2016 10:01 pm

I remember when great people like Armstrong and others would take pictures with the president after space walks and moon landings. Now heroes are shamed and state propoganist like Nye are held in high esteem.

Doug S
April 6, 2016 9:49 pm

The stupid among us are actually quit amazing. Look into their eyes, they have the confidence of fools.

Chris Riley
Reply to  Doug S
April 6, 2016 10:11 pm

Dunning Kruger effect. This explains so much of that which infuriates us.

April 6, 2016 10:21 pm

Someone’s always “saving” and “forcing” lately. Please do neither.

April 6, 2016 11:09 pm

Bill Nye is an idiot, his interview with Lindzen was well, embarrassing, I was shocked that he was actually as thick as he was.
He is a perfect match for his two stupefied chums in that pic, one being the quite less than averagely intelligent Obama (not an exaggeration) and the Astrophysicist who has done nothing for Astrophysics in his whole career.
Basically three people who have never done anything for science (unless you count TV shows and Obama’s corruption of science via the EPA)

April 6, 2016 11:53 pm

The three blind mice…
Couldn’t resist, another video of the Golf MK1

Patrick MJD
Reply to  nc
April 6, 2016 11:57 pm

49psi on the blower? And you wonder why this thing performs the way it does. It will have to be 4×4 too…

Patrick MJD
Reply to  nc
April 7, 2016 12:21 am

Ok it is 4×4, 4motion, so looks like a Mk1. but not really!

David Ball
Reply to  Charles Rotter
April 7, 2016 9:01 pm

Hello Charles!!! Hope you are well. All the best to you.

April 7, 2016 12:59 am

IMO, there’s a case of confounding variables. Older people are generally more conservative too.
Since millenials have been indoctrinated since the cradle with this AGW crap, it is not surprising that it is a prominent part of their worldview.

Reply to  Greg
April 7, 2016 1:01 am

One of the few advantages of getting old is the wisdom of experience. By the time millenials reach 50, they may have overcome their indoctrination and seen through it.

April 7, 2016 1:03 am

Seriously, the chart illustrates a broader issue. My local council (and the UK government come to that) is increasingly relying on internet-based communications, at the risk of leaving older people behind. The chart picks this up nicely.

April 7, 2016 1:07 am

Of course as the models projections do not occur, hopefully the millenials’ will have received enough education to ask “why not?”

Peta in Cumbria
April 7, 2016 1:27 am

Do these people ever put their brains into gear before opening their mouths? This is getting quite worrisome.
Are they saying that millennials don’t grow old?
Is it because they themselves are stuck in some permanent childhood Baby World?
And they’ve got an even bigger problem in that Western populations are aging as people live longer and have fewer babies

April 7, 2016 1:41 am

Here are some of the responses I get from most millennials:
‘never heard of gavin Schmidt.’
‘Sea level is rising 8 inches a year.’
‘Earth’s average temperature rose 2C since 2000.’
-a 30F day in Wisconsin in January had one person worried.
‘the IPCC is not funded by the UN.’
‘we need to start blowing up power plants.’

Reply to  ClimateOtter
April 7, 2016 6:29 am

I think rather than blow up power plants, the old people need to shut them down now and let the millennials experience no power. No cell phone, no internet, no social media. Don’t wait until the government slowly shuts them down. Do it now and illustrate where this is all going. (If the plants can’t be shut down, then shut down the electrical usage at home—shut off a few breakers off and let your kids live the ideal life. Oh, and take those phones and tablets, car keys, etc. After all, it’s to save the planet.)

April 7, 2016 1:58 am

millennials are in debt ($1 trillion-plus in student loans) so good luck getting them to fund the $100 trilion CAGW scam….er energy transformation.
millennials who live at home and pay no bills might say they believe in CAGW (for what that’s worth) but, if sceptical parents pretend to agree and say the family is giving up smart phones, internet, etc in order to reduce the family’s carbon footprint, they’ll soon rationalise why there’s no point in actually doing anything…a bit like Canadian millennial(?) Madeleine!
5 Apr: Guardian: Madeleine Somerville: How I deal with the unbearable hypocrisy of being an environmentalist
It’s not easy living green without going completely off the grid, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do what we can – and accept that sometimes we’ll fail
This hypocrisy is a delicate balancing act. It speaks to the seemingly inescapable reality of this North American machine we’ve built and which now runs our life.
In order to avoid it, one needs to escape to the woods, go off the grid. You’ll subtract most of your environmental impact by doing so. I think everyone fantasises about it from time to time (I certainly do), but you’ll also lose priceless human connection and culture, alongside the ability to educate or inspire change in others.
The fear of navigating this cognitive dissonance, as well as the fear of armchair critics declaring that you’ve failed is, I believe, at the heart of many people’s reluctance to adopt more green practices…
I think George Monbiot summed it up best: “Hypocrisy is the gap between your aspirations and your actions. Greens have high aspirations – they want to live more ethically – and they will always fall short. But the alternative to hypocrisy isn’t moral purity (no one manages that), but cynicism. Give me hypocrisy any day.”
About: Sweet Madeleine

April 7, 2016 2:16 am

Bill Nye would lose his faith in youth if he compared the lifestyle consumption of today’s youngsters compared with those that came before them. They expect higher standards and a greater quantity of everything. On paper, energy use is less but that’s down to fuel changes and efficiency, not a fundamental change in behaviour.

April 7, 2016 3:19 am

Judging by the ones that work for me, millennials would be hard-pressed to be able to spell “climate change” let alone “save the world” … as my old granddaddy used to say, “full of pizz and wind!”

Mike Bromley the Kurd
April 7, 2016 5:08 am

Oh sure, just kick us in the stomach, you thug.

Doug Bunge
April 7, 2016 5:23 am

The Republicans will support AGW when they decide they want the power that goes along with regulating CO2 (and thereby almost everything, including the economy).

April 7, 2016 6:19 am

Yes Bill, and they have had good training with debt management (see below) and excellent propaganda instruction in schools, including rigged science experiments that you had a hand in.
From WSJ:
More Than 40% of Student Borrowers Aren’t Making Payments
New figure raises worries that millions of them may never repay more than $200 billion owed

April 7, 2016 6:43 am

The graph shows it is politics, not age that determines your belief in climate change. This is only logical, because “climate change” is not a scientific term, it is a political term.
What is the formal scientific definition of “climate change”? Is this the same definition used by the press and politicians? Does this definition include natural variability or is it limited to only human caused changes?
Unless and until there is a formal definition for the term “climate change”, what is there to debate? No one is even certain what they are talking about.
Any debate on “climate change” should start by defining the term, because it is this lack of definition that has turned a scientific debate into a political debate.
For example: imagine that the word “and” had two different meanings. It could mean “and”, or it could mean “or”. Try this out on a few sentences to see the effect. Logical argument flies out the window. This is the same thing that happens when there are multiple definitions for “climate change”, none of which are agreed.

April 7, 2016 7:51 am

I grew up watching Don Herbert – The Original Mr. Wizard. Having no Science Background, he thoroughly researched every experiment and show demonstration, using scientists and engineers to validate the methods he used on every program. Having only a background in the Entertainment Industry, Don was aware of his inadequacies and therefore sought out knowledgeable sources before allowing anything to be broadcast. Bill Nye, on the other hand, has taken his Ego as “The Science Guy” to mean that he is actually a Scientist. As noted previously, the best he can claim is a Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering. I have watched several of Bill Nye’s Shows and it is very obvious that he knows virtually NOTHING about most of what he presents. When he appears before Legislative Committees, he claims to be a Scientist, but he is nothing more than a far Left Entertainer with no scientific credentials.

CD in Wisconsin
April 7, 2016 10:36 am

“……Climate denial is almost entirely generational. Only now and then do you meet a young person — nobody your age is a climate denier. Very few. It’s all old people.”
Let me say first of all that I’m not a scientist here. To me however, alarmists like Bill Nye who are labelling
and mischaractarizing people who are skeptical of the CAGW theory (Deniers!! Skeptics are only old people!!) are displaying either an ignorance of the scientific method as a standard part of scientific discourse or are attempting to supress the application of the scientific method to the theory.
If it is the latter, then it becomes patently obvious to me that alarmists like Nye probably realize all to well that they have something (and probably plenty) to hide when claiming the theory is proven or at least has scientific validity. It doesn’t takes a Phd in a scientific field to reason this out and undestand it.
If Nye truly understands the scientific method and scientific discourse the way he should (or claims to), he would not be making the above quoted statement. A true understanding of science and how scientific discourse works with the scientific method (at least as I understand it) does not and should not involve this kind of behavior. Either that, or he has joined those who have caused the CAGW theory to morph into a religion or ideology in a quest to achieve political ends. In the case of the latter, ignoring, suppressing or badmouthing the falsifying scientific evidence becomes standard behavior in one’s defense of the Holy Faith and one’s political ends. Money, power and control.
Whatever it is that is going on Nye’s head, making such statements demonstrates the clown that he is when trying to pass himself off as someone with qualifying scientific credentials in the area of climate science (and probably other scientific fields as well).
Again, I am not a scientist. But from following WUWT as long as I have, it is not difficult at all for me to see right through this guy. In climate science at least, he has all the credibility of a three dollar bill.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
April 7, 2016 10:54 am

…..and I would like to thank Anthony, the scientists and everyone else here at WUWT who have all enlightened me enough about the climate to see right through Nye and his climate alarmism.

April 7, 2016 12:13 pm

Not sure why anyone would pay attention to what Bill Nye says, but on this topic he may be closer to be correct than he ever is on science related subjects.
Our kids believe the CAGW theme. Last week I was talking to one of our young electrical engineers and she too was surprised anyone didn’t believe climate change was a threat to be worried about. When intelligent, educated (particularly technically educated) people have bought into the storyline so completely, I’m not sure there is anything we can do.

Reply to  timg56
April 7, 2016 12:25 pm

Yes, but if she graduated in the last decade, she also probably believes in when when encounters a microaggression she needs to seek her closest safe space…

April 7, 2016 12:28 pm

“In my opinion, the answer is that Bill Nye is wrong” Bill Nye is always wrong…a modern day Pied Piper.

April 7, 2016 1:14 pm

The whole argument of AGW and climate change is politically driven as a means of redistribution of wealth and the diminishment of the power of western nations and the preeminent status of the United States. Included is the non-articulated but implied need for vast population reduction in the misguided opinion of certain UN sub-groups. Having said that, I argue that there is a much bigger problem looming ahead which could be used as a challenge to the younger generation and certainly to school children. I have set forth my rebuttal & challenge to Bill Nye, Neil DeGrasse Tyson and the rest, in this well referenced article: “Global Warming – Climate Change –Is Not The Big Problem; What Really Must Be Done & Why” at:

Gunga Din
April 7, 2016 3:43 pm

Reminds me of something.
“When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.”
― Mark Twain
Paying attention to life as you age is not a guarantee of wisdom…but it helps.
You’ve heard many people say many things that didn’t pan-out.
Youth haven’t had the time to see what didn’t pan-out.
The big step for the young and old is to admit, “Maybe I was wrong.”
I think that was Mark Twain’s humorously made point.
(It doesn’t apply to all, but the phrase, “Young and dumb.” comes to mind.)

Gunga Din
Reply to  Gunga Din
April 9, 2016 10:42 am

(Mods, Thanks.)

Gunga Din
April 7, 2016 3:59 pm

I just made a comment that has disappeared.
Maybe I used an “auto-bit-bin” word. Maybe I messed up on my end.
Could you please check?

Gunga Din
Reply to  Gunga Din
April 7, 2016 4:11 pm

Here’s the quote without my added comments.
When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.”
― Mark Twain

April 7, 2016 8:43 pm

Stereotypes are valid in some circumstances.
Stereotyping is ingrained in humans; it is a survival skill, which helps humans determine which outside groups (unknown to the tribe) might be dangerous, and which are not.
But we should always be careful when lumping everyone into one group, especially nowadays, because it can lead us astray in our thinking and our perception of reality.
I think the divide over alarmists and skeptics is politically related, not age related. There are real smart young folks who are skeptics, and there are sadly uninformed young folks who are alarmists. 🙂

April 7, 2016 10:47 pm

The sooner we stop talking about Bill Nye the sooner he can go back to being Speed Walker, Super Hero (Google it).

Brian H
April 9, 2016 7:57 pm

Reliable data rulez, and AGW ain’t got any.

Verified by MonsterInsights