Bill Nye Loses The Plot

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

Bill Nye the not-really-Science Guy was on Tucker Carlson tonight. Tucker tried time after time to get Nye to say how much of the change was due to humans … and time after time, Nye refused to say what his opinion was.

So Tucker got him to agree that the climate has always been changing.

Then, in response to the question as to “what the climate would be like if humans weren’t involved right now”, Bill Nye said (according to my own transcription):

NYE: “The climate would be like it was in 1750. And the economics would be that you could not grow wine-worthy grapes in Britain as you can today because the climate is changing. The use of pesticides in the Midwest would not be increasing because the pests are showing up sooner and staying around longer. The forests in Wyoming would not be overwhelmed by pine bark beetles as it is because of climate change. That’s how the world would be different if it were not for humans”.

Oh, my goodness. Isn’t that touching? Nye refuses to say how much of the change in temperature is due to humans … but at the same time he claims that if there weren’t humans, that the climate would have stopped changing in 1750. Without humans, he says, we would have a climate which was forever the same …

… and people actually believe this guy? Tucker Carlson was scathing:

CARLSON: You’re not even a scientist, you’re an engineer … So much of this you don’t know, you pretend that you know, and you gotta believe people who ask you questions.

Another escapade in the world of pseudo-science. Anyhow, after writing this I found a YouTube video of the interview—check it out, it’s good for a laugh.

Regards to all,

w.

PS—When you comment PLEASE QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE DISCUSSING, so we can all be clear about your subject.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
tobyglyn

I thought the biggest news from Nye was that there will be no more ice ages – woohoo!!!!

Carlson missed a big opportunity with that lead in, if he knew the proper reply.

BFL

If Carlson had educated himself a bit more (perhaps by watching wattsupwiththat) then the most obvious shut down would have been to present the computer prognostication versus satellite data and historical sea level graphs. But knowing Nye, he would have fallen back on: “Oh no no no, it’s the satellite and sea level data that need to be adjusted to fit the computer predictions.”

RWturner

That’s why Billy Nye the children entertainer guy doesn’t do these when there is an actual scientist present.

Joel Snider

‘That’s why Billy Nye the children entertainer guy doesn’t do these when there is an actual scientist present.’

Hell, you don’t even need a scientist – Marc Morano made him look like a stuttering idiot.

Jim Mayer

.
Hey, at least Bill Nye is honest enough to admit he doesn’t give a damn about our children’s future when he says, “This extreme doubt about climate change is affecting MY quality of life..”

BUT THE OTHER LEFTEROIDS REPEATEDLY TELL US WE ARE DESTROYING OUR CHILDREN’S FUTURE BY CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING & YET THIS QUESTION GOES UNASKED:

If our kid’s future means so much, how do they justify robbing future generations by spending us into $20T in debt? In Reagan’s day our debt was 30% of our GDP. Today, our debt is at 104%, PROVING it’s not about our kids’ future, it’s just a scam to redistribute wealth & destroy our economy & our country!

The Manchurian Candidate nearly doubled US debt during his term & what do we have to show for it?
Every one of these catagories has worsened:
1. Poverty
2. Education
3. Health Care
4. Cybersecurity
5. Race Relations
6. Foreign Relations
7. Global Terrorist Threat
8. U.S. Workforce Participation
9. Trust in Government and Media

Tenets of Climate Religion:
1) Global Warming
2) It’s due to mankind
3) It’s going to be catastrophic
4) The US can do something about it.

Jim Mayer

The Truth? Warming is GOOD for the planet. More CO2 is GOOD for plant life.
We have had more CO2 present in the atmosphere in earlier eras,
before industry. We’ve experienced almost no additional
warming since 1998, even though atmospheric CO2
has continued to increase in it.

Jim Mayer

Thousands of Climate Scientists around the globe disagree with the “official” conlusions. Many in the US dare not speak for fear their funding be withdrawn. Cover-ups and corruption abounds, from ‘Climategate’ at East Anglia to the current refusal by NOAA, under subpoena, to provide docs concerning GW studies! Perhaps it’s National Security Secrets they’re guarding!

Leftists are craftsmen with the English language. They know how to communicate. They understand how words impact the mind. Eg. once, Liberals were known briefly as “pro-abortion.” They decided that sounded too harsh, and for PR purposes, they changed their advocacy name to “pro-choice.” Their position on abortion didn’t change, just the name.

This has been their MO for decades. They use words to manipulate the public into forming the desired opinions. They’re not illegal immigrants, they’re Dreamers.

Obamacare won’t cause medical bills to skyrocket, it’s called the ‘Affordable Care Act.’

What do you think of when you here the word “carbon?’ I think of that dirty, black underside to carbon paper. That’s why they dropped the “Dioxide” from the “Carbon Dioxide,” so that it would sound more hideous. we’re talking about a gas that makes up approx .04% (or 400 parts per million) of our atmosphere.

The very same substance that all the flowers in the world need in order to live. And all the trees in the world, all the crops, grasses, and every other type of vegetation. We exhale it, they inhale it, then exhale oxygen that we inhale.

Goldrider

I sure as shootin’ would NOT want to be living in the Little Ice Age (ca. 1750). Nye just certified himself as a completely ignorant poltroon.

hornblower

I agree that man-made global warming is exaggerated. The rest of your treatise about the good old days is also exaggerated.

Eric Blair

Jim Mayer @ 3:48 p.m.

It’s called NewSpeak. RTFM – ‘1984’ by Orwell.

WTF

I must have been watching a different interview, I saw a rude, smug loudmouth shouting Bill down while dismissing his simple answer to his simple question thereby providing a wonderful example of cognitive dissonance.

R. Shearer

Bill needs to have an eyebrow artist flown in to do some remedial infrastructure work.

I thought I heard Nye respond at one point that 100% of climate change was man made. Of course when one defines climate change as man made climate change then 100% of man made climate change is man made. Of course nobody can come up with our real contribution but 100 % of man made climate change is man made. He also slipped up and claimed we would be in another ice age if it wasn’t for our contribution to climate change. If he is right about that, then I am sure glad we are contributing. I love the climate we have had for the past 20 years so I hope we keep contributing enough to avoid that ice age. If the climate and CO2 level were like it was in 1750 a bunch of people would be going hungry.

Jason Calley

Hey WTF! “I saw a rude, smug loudmouth shouting Bill down”

Well, yeah, actually that is true.

On the other hand, Nye is still an idiot. So how did scientific discourse come to this? My observation is that discussion of CAGW has devolved to rudeness and shouting because the alarmists have forced it to be that way. It was not sceptics who began using shouting and rudeness as weapons. For decades, sceptics politely asked for REAL scientific discussion on the subject. The response from the alarmists was that “the science is settled!”, claims that sceptics were “deniers” and the equivalent to antisemitic purveyors of genocide, threats against scientists who spoke out with questions, and even talk of charging sceptics with war crimes. The alarmists are the ones who equated scientific discussion with war crimes.

You wanted a war — you got it. Quit whining.

Jbird

Apparently you watched a different interview. I saw a smug, complacent, ignorant clown in a bow tie posing as an expert on climate change, who could not answer a simple question about what amount humans were contributing to climate change. It was embarrassing to watch. I feel sorry for Nye.

Jbird

Mr. Nye;
“It ain’t what you know that gets you into trouble; it’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so” -Mark Twain

Chris Nelli

Sad.

Antti.Naali

Nonono! Bill Nye is the best thing we can wish for. Sanders is the second best.

Jim Mayer

Thousands of Climate Scientists around the globe disagree with the “official” conlusions. Many in the US dare not speak for fear their funding be withdrawn. Cover-ups and corruption abounds, from ‘Climategate’ at East Anglia to the current refusal by NOAA, under subpoena, to provide docs concerning GW studies! Perhaps it’s National Security Secrets they’re guarding!

Leftists are craftsmen with the English language. They know how to communicate. They understand how words impact the mind. Eg. once, Liberals were known briefly as “pro-abortion.” They decided that sounded too harsh, and for PR purposes, they changed their advocacy name to “pro-choice.” Their position on abortion didn’t change, just the name.

This has been their MO for decades. They use words to manipulate the public into forming the desired opinions. They’re not illegal immigrants, they’re Dreamers.

Obamacare won’t cause medical bills to skyrocket, it’s called the ‘Affordable Care Act.’

What do you think of when you here the word “carbon?’ I think of that dirty, black underside to carbon paper. That’s why they dropped the “Dioxide” from the “Carbon Dioxide,” so that it would sound more hideous. we’re talking about a gas that makes up approx .04% (or 400 parts per million) of our atmosphere.

The very same substance that all the flowers in the world need in order to live. And all the trees in the world, all the crops, grasses, and every other type of vegetation. We exhale it, they inhale it, then exhale oxygen that we inhale.

kokoda - the most deplorable

Jim Mayer……..finally, someone that understands how the liberal left uses words, its effect, and how much smarter they are to organize and execute.
Yes, people within their org, they do make mistakes.

Tim

Bill Nye the Séance Guy.

Greg

Without humans, he says, we would have a climate which was forever the same …

cliamte change DEENYER !

Bill Nye the Séance LIE.

Greg

Nye is a TV children’s clown , not a scientist.

Pop Piasa

Just like Pee Wee was…
Just not as optimistic about his “world”.

Michael C. Roberts

And…here is an example of where and what Mr. Nye was at and was doing back in the 1990’s. He started as bit-part cast member of a local Seattle comedy-skit show called ‘Almost Live!’, that aired IIRC Saturday evenings either before or after the nationally-syndicated program Saturday Night Live (Local Western Washingtonians such as Janice may recall…my kids were small back then, and I usually did not catch the show as an as-aired performance). A kitschy cameo piece on ‘Almost Live!’, that eventually morphed into a Public Broadcasting System (PBS) kids’ show – where he finally made it into the greater USA public eye. PBS is also where he developed his ‘legitimacy’ with at least youngsters – and parents. I would think his PBS program is where he is remembered as a legitimate “Science-type’ guy. A clip of some of his ‘work’ back then:

So, a comedy troupe actor, come PBS ‘Science’ program star, and eventually developing (devolving?) into one of the spokesmen for the Warminista cabal.

What a Curriculum Vitae, I say.

Food submitted for thought,

MCR

Dean

That footage of Bill trying to crush the drum is so like the climate propaganda. the experiment doesn’t show what you said it would, so you have to fiddle with the results……..

Rhee

“Whatever Bill does, Don’t do that at home!”
That’s an adage worth more than its weight in CO2 credits.

Annie

Weren’t grapes grown as far north as Hadrian’s Wall in Roman times?

Mike Bromley the wannabe Kurd

Yes. Funny that.

richard verney

Where ever you see road names like Vine Street, it is probably the case that there was, in olden days, a vineyard nearby.

There are many old streets in the North of England named Vine Street. In fact even in Scotland in and around the northern borders.

Bill Marsh

I’m missing something and I think Carlson missed it as well.

If Nye doesn’t know how much of ‘climate change’ is due to human influence, how can he logically claim that, without human influence, the climate would be just as it was in 1750? Isn’t that a ‘back door’ claim that ALL ‘climate change’ since 1750 is due to human influence and human influence alone? It’s an absurd claim to begin with.

Would have loved to see Carlson point that out.

RockyRoad

You are absolutely correct, Bill… It takes as much knowledge about the subject to do subtraction as it does addition, and B. Nye is obviously clueless about both.

That said, the take-away was obvious when Nye launched into some inane, irreproducible argument that tied all science into a knot and left us with the joyful feeling that CAGW apologists are more desperate now than they’ve been in decades.

Maybe it has something to do with the position President Trump is taking by un-funding this frivolous, unscientific endeavor by pink-slipping an army of has-been charlatans that, like B. Nye, laughingly call themselves “scientists”.

Exactly. Carlson missed a perfect opportunity to point this out and, therefore, contradict the notion that “natural climate change takes tens of thousand or millions of years” to take place. Critics of AGW dogma should focus more of their rhetoric on the 1500 year cycle.

Mann et al’s claim that the MWP and LIA were regional events is poorly substantiated and rings of a convenient “truth.”

ironicman

I thought Mann said the LIA started in a regional sort of way.

Those claims may be debunked later. You don’t often see a dude such as this face public scrutiny. Tucker got him to show some cards, particularly that final OT rant.

richard verney

It is funny really since we have no worthwhile data on the Southern Hemisphere. Even today, it is too sparsely sampled to know anything useful about the temperature change over the past 70 years, let alone circa 1,000 years ago.

In my opinion, it entirely unscientific to suggest that we have any handle on temperatures in the Southern Hemisphere, or globally.

We have data on the Northern Hemisphere, which if it was not corrupted, could tell us something about temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere since the late 1700s.early 1800s. Thus we should only be viewing the Minoan, Roman, Medieval Warm Periods against what we know about the Northern Hemisphere.

Mike McMillan

I seem to recall that the MWP shows up in the Quelccaya ice cap cores in Peru, ice cores from Dome C in Antarctica, and some speleothems from somewhere in southern Africa, all below the equator.

Chimp

Richard,

The SH isn’t as well sampled as the NH, but well enough to see the same cooling and warming cycles.

There are good paleoproxy data from ice and ocean and lake sediment cores and from land evidence in Asia, Africa, South America and Australasia.

CO2science.org has good info on the global (though not exactly synchronized) Medieval Warm Period, here:
http://co2science.org/data/mwp/mwpp.php

If anyone reading this is not already familiar with http://co2science.org/ then please do yourself a favor and look at it now. It is an incredible resource. Sherwood, Craig & Keith Idso are Great Americans.

i enjoy watching Carlson, but he really could have had some help with that interview.

From Woods Hole Institute, “A new 2,000-year-long reconstruction of sea surface temperatures (SST) from the Indo-Pacific warm pool (IPWP) suggests that temperatures in the region may have been as warm during the Medieval Warm Period as they are today.
The IPWP is the largest body of warm water in the world, and, as a result, it is the largest source of heat and moisture to the global atmosphere, and an important component of the planet’s climate.” http://www.whoi.edu/main/news-releases/2009?tid=3622&cid=59106
And the Little Ice Age was found to be as apparent in South America as in the US or Europe https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141119204521.htm

Mark There are several studies that suggest that climate changes in terms of decades or even years are as fast or faster than today. “As the world slid into and out of the last ice age, the general cooling and warming trends were punctuated by abrupt changes. Climate shifts up to half as large as the entire difference between ice age and modern conditions occurred over hemispheric or broader regions in mere years to decades.”
http://www.pnas.org/content/97/4/1331.full
“Researchers at Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg have shown in the latest edition of the journal Nature Communications that the temperature changes millions of years ago probably happened no more slowly than they are happening today.”
https://phys.org/news/2015-11-global-fast-today.html

Also the apparent glacial change that is purported by people like Nye today, is in fact an artifact of the measuring technique.
https://phys.org/news/2015-11-ancient-climate-underestimated.html

G3Ellis

And they can now by this really cool thing that a “non-scientist” discovered, hybridization.

The traditional wine grapes won’t grown in the SE US. But that is because of a fungus (so most grapes are scuppernong and muscadine hybrids.) But NY state was considered #2 behind CA for wine when I was involved back in the late 70’s.

Gloateus Maximus

NY is still a very distant second to CA, at about the same as WA. CA, OR and WA together produce about 93% of all US wine:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wine#Largest_producers

And also the highest quality and most expensive, of course.

Number Five PA produces a little more than half as much as #4 OR, followed by OH, KY, MO, NJ and TX.

James

I work at a winery on the St Lawrence River, on the border with Canada. We grow hybrid grapes developed by the University of Minnesota. They grow well here, and are cold tolerant to -40 degrees C. So some of the movement northward of grape production in the United States, is due to new varieties being developed. European grapes do not survive the winter here. They taste better than the Vitis labrusca, which are the American foxy native grapes!

I grew grapes in Michigan, European varieties too, not fox grapes. That was back during the cool spell from the 1970’s when the Alarmists were whining about a looming Ice age.

Yes, when it was WARMER than today. They works have great difficulty browsing there now.

Nye is your classic snakeoil salesman, and a blithering idiot who cannot even look at his history book.

Argh! Mobile autocorrect attack!
“They would have great difficulty growing them there now.”

Nye strikes me as genuine. He believes what he is selling, so I wouldn’t write him off as a snake oil salesman. He’s just a product of a very effective marketing campaign by the alarmists.

To a large portion of the public, the alarmists have successfully painted the CAGW issue as just another pro-science versus anti-science controversy. The undereducated see global warming “deniers” as little different than fundamentalists arguing for young Earth theory. I think this campaign worked on Nye and I think that combined with his passion for science, he is doing what he thinks is right.

No they weren’t.

catweazle666

“No they weren’t.”

Yes they were.

There are at this moment grapes growing as far North as Castle Bolton, Leyburn. North Yorkshire at 54.3 degrees North.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Bolton+Castle/@54.3221009,-1.9516587,17.06z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x8f3528cb47cbcaa7!8m2!3d54.3221419!4d-1.9495147

Hadrian’s Wall is very little further North, here for example:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.9904156,-2.6064345,14.64z

Jerry Howard

During the Middle Age “Climate Optimum” the French vineyards were suffering from English competition.
(Of course though, that must be a misunderstanding since the AGW “Science Guys” claim that the Medieval Warm Period didn’t really happen….)

Michael 2

I believe it is impossible to know what the climate (in any particular location; there is no global climate) would be right now without humans. What I know is that 1750 would not exist as “1750” and right now would not be 2017 without humans.

Mike Bromley the wannabe Kurd

Climate Science has never ever defined what the ideal climate is. The most glaring of their long streak of inconsistencies….the one which their precious “change” is founded.

Mike Bromley the wannabe Kurd

…the one UPON which…

John Silver

Climate Science has never ever defined what climate is.

Mike @ 11:23

Yes, that’s the weak link. Whenever you ask them just what is this lost Nirvana we’re supposed to pine for…what is their ideal temperature, CO2 level, etc. They can never answer that one properly.

TAD

I think Tucker nailed the central question – which you are touching on – but only came close to getting it out with full impact. His question was this: how can you say humans have caused a (CO2-driven) deviation from normal climate variation, without a scientific baseline of what that climate variation would look like minus the claimed deviating influence? Nye couldn’t answer it, and neither can any other “CO2 global warming” advocate. That means the claim of human-caused, CO2-driven climate change is scientifically baseless.

Tom Halla

1750 was still the Little Ice Age. So Nye believes humans are responsible for the end of the Little Ice Age? What does he think caused it, or the Dark Age cold spell? He also seems to be denying the Mann et al hockey stick graph, by the way.

RockyRoad

I hear the Little Ice Age ended ~1860 as warming pulled us into a period of time where plants would grow where they otherwise hadn’t for some time.

Apparently B. Nye would like to live in an Ice Age and use his questionable engineering skills to survive.

I wish him luck although I strongly suspect he’d fail.

Retired Kit P

We are still in an ice age, just the abnormal part of the ice age with less ice.

As an engineer I can say I am nor impressed with Nye’s engineering accomplishments.

And Rocky you are welcome. My engineering skills at power plants helped you not live in a cave on cold winter nights.

What a stupid,messed up man,Mr. Nye is.

Pop Piasa

Ahh, but an elite man he is!

Doug

Anthony did a wonderful job a showing how Bill Nye faked a high school science experiment. I would like to see him have to account for that on national news.

I had a real problem with this statement by Nye
“The forests in Wyoming would not be overwhelmed by pine bark beetles as it is because of climate change”
I would point to just one study that explains the Mountain Pine Beetle problems ( and BTW there are many different beetles in our forests that attack all species of trees) It is largely cyclical and caused by aging old tress that weaken and get attacked, forest fires used to then regenerate the next stand of trees , largely every 100 years. It has been mostly human fire control methods that have broken the cycle of natural regeneration
Nye please read this: http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/projects/63

Mike Bromley the wannabe Kurd

Nice dodge, Mr.Nye. “The climate would be like it was in 1750” And how was that, now? Please, Mr. Science Guy, define that climate. Not by how it WASN’T, but by how it WAS. Let’s face it, you scowling manteufel, you don’t have a CLUE what that “ideal climate” is. Not even the best climate scientist IN THE WORLD (Whomever that is) can define that ideal climate state. No UNFCCC hack can, either (she defines it as a time where capitalism isn’t). The IPCC cannot. Theirs is a balancing act between the “Summary for Policymakers” and the agonizing convolutions of uncertainty in their AR’s.

Nice little deflection, Bill. But now that the Holdrens and Obamas of the world are sidelined, your support network for blowhard intellectualism is crumbling, and you sir, will appear as an arse from now on. Your selfie-taking days are over.

Mat

Weren’t the French passing laws in the 12/13th century to ban English wine. You know, wine made with English grown grapes…

Les Francis

They tried that trick with Australian wine. When it didn’t work they tried a different tack – Buying up the Australian competition and vinyards.

Noix

The Australians bought some French ones too, in Pays D’Oc. This was done because the Romans valued wine from there above all else in their empire, but the French used it for cheap wine in large quantities.

angech

Love the interrupt app. 6.22 seconds?
Did it work both ways.
got to get one of those.

I could scarcely believe that Nye would have the temerity to do that. It was such an inane statement to make.

RockyRoad

It was all pretty much a pile of gobbledygook from B. Nye, the “science guy”.

Nick Milner

Nye said it was considerably less than 6 seconds whilst holding up a timer showing *more* than 6 seconds. Hey, alarmists, amirite?

Art

“The forests in Wyoming would not be overwhelmed by pine bark beetles as it is because of climate change.”

Not so. This is my area of expertise. It’s true that warmer weather will help the beetles, but not that much. The big reason for the beetle epidemic is that the trees are old. Young, vigorous trees push invading beetles out with sap flow but old, decadent trees have a much slower metabolism and can’t do that. We’ve been way to effective in fighting forest fires for the last 100 plus years, and the forests are much older than they used to be.

Nigel in Santa Barbara

+1 How very interesting.

AP

So pretty much every claim he made is wrong then.

Harry Passfield

(My original comment here disappeared…)

AP: Pretty much everything he didn’t claim was wrong. He hasn’t a clearly thought out idea in his head.

Alan Robertson

Harry,
Nye is an engineer and therefore has the mental capacity to follow scientific arguments. Can Nye afford to think clearly about the things he said? He makes a great deal of money from his publicly advocacy of those claims.
Had Bill Nye explored each of his claims, he would have found himself on the wrong side of the truth. What a dilemma! His growing anger as Tucker Carlson pushed the conversation towards the truth spoke volumes.
At some point in past, Nye chose agenda over truth.

Javert Chip

Apparently, Nye assumed he could mau-mau Tucker Carlson with his “scientificness”, just like the big boys (Mann, etc) claim to do.

Wrong assumption (even against a somewhat weak Carlson).

Nye needs to return to the back of the warmest pack and stick to tasks for which he is qualified (e.g.: emptying & cleaning chamber pots).

Yea, I apologize to WUWT readers for the ad hominem, but “Science Guy” offers little else than his naivete.

MarkW

I’ve also read that because of fire fighting, the forests haven’t been thinned as they usually are. The result is more trees fighting for the same resources, so all trees are more stressed, making them more vulnerable to the beetle.

Doug

Exactly. The claim is made that the pine beetles took off because of the lack of extreme cold. However, near the “icebox of the nation”. Frasier ,Colorado there is massive beetle kill. South into New Mexico and Arizona where it is warmer, similar forests are in much better condition.

Dave Kelly

Apparently Nye, lacking experience with mountain pine beetles, didn’t know the larvae produced an natural antifreeze (glycerol) that protects them to 30 F below zero. So, cold winters don’t slow them much. (An extreme early freeze can slow them down a bit because the beetles only start producing glycerol at the first sign of cool weather.)

Retired Kit P

Thank you Art, I think the biggest environmental problem in North America is forest heath issues associated with too much wood in semi-arid forest.

Engineering solutions include using waste wood for energy. Beatle killed lodge pole pine make beautiful log homes.

This is followed by control burns which rejuvenates the forest floor without creating a hard pan.

Dave in Canmore

“The forests in Wyoming would not be overwhelmed by pine bark beetles as it is because of climate change.”

Well, that is a testable statement. Here’s temp data from Grand Teton Forest in Wyoming from 1910-now

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/cgi-bin/broker?id=480140&_PROGRAM=prog.gplot_meanclim_mon_yr2014.sas&_SERVICE=default&param=TMEANRAW&minyear=1896&maxyear=2014

Looking at data rather than just guessing as Nye does, I see the mean temp INCREASED 3 degrees between 1910-1940 BEFORE we added much CO2. Then as we emitted MORE CO2, the temps DECREASED 3-4 degrees for 30 years! Currently the temperature is no different than at many points in the last 100 years.

Dear Bill Nye, you are losing because thanks to the internet, Joes like me can verify your statements with real data in 2 minutes. Nothing makes people more upset than being lied to.

PS When I compare observation to a hypothesis, that is what actual science looks like Mr Nye.

Pop Piasa

I wonder if this Hollywood professor realizes how easily the “unwashed” common sense crowd can recognise his spin and check his facts?
I was reminded of Dr Happer’s words “glassy eyed and chanting”.

Caligula Jones

“We’ve been way to effective in fighting forest fires for the last 100 plus years, and the forests are much older than they used to be.”

Yep. That, and the hippies don’t want us to do ANYTHING that isn’t “natural” to a forest.

Retired Kit P

So smoking pot and playing loud music is why hippies go camping in the mountains.

Ecomentalists both want to save the trees yet at the same time want to burn then for energy instead of coal. Wow, are they confused or what?

les

“The big reason for the beetle epidemic is that the trees are old”.

Outside (South east) of Prtince George BC is an area of about 100 squre miles of what were once vigorous young 25-30 year old pines (I talked to the guys who planted them). The devastation from those beetles was incredible. Nothing left but dead sticks and some random young fir poking its way up through the snow.

The beetles ate young and old. They may have at one time preferred the old ones, but it sure seems they have acquired a taste for the young.

“They” also said that pine bettles would never go for the lodgepole pine of the northern boreal forest. Tell that to the guys fighting the invasion of the beetles in northern Alberta.

Perhaps the beetles adapted… perhaps they evolved… but please do not leave the impression that they would have been happy only eating southern Wyoming geriatrics

“The forests in Wyoming would not be overwhelmed by pine bark beetles as it is because of climate change”. According to Nye. I made a similar comment up thread a few minutes ago.

Read this one and there are a few more regarding BC http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/projects/63 Confirmed by this study,
Great point Art.

Roger Knights

IIRC, low rainfall some years back (when the beetles invaded) made it hard for the trees to create enough sap to overwhelm them.

Ore-gonE left

The real alarm with the “science guy; Isn’t he paraded at many K-12 schools in “science” videos? No wonder our public schools are falling behind globally. The man is a blight on society! His grey matter is obviously infected and is infecting the unsuspecting students.

ironargonaut

I told my kids if they see Nye or Suzuki that what they are hearing is probably wrong.

Exactly. My family now knows that whenever Billy Nye, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, or David Suzuki appear on TV – I have to fight my gag reflex.

Caligula Jones

When my son was in high school, I had to have a discussion with his “science” teacher about my son’s skepticism. It wasn’t as polite as I had hoped it would be…

Yes, many years ago, when I was teaching science, I ordered a video that Bill Nye had produced and had to send it back with a scathing letter describing how Bill Nye had gotten the science concept presented exactly backward. I knew from that moment to keep away from anything in which this dolt was involved. He doesn’t know his backside orifice from a hole in the earth.

K-Bob

Bill Nye is the Pee Wee Herman of CAGW cause. This video is kind of like Pee Wee Herman squeezing his bicycle horn for skeptics to get our of his way. What a nerdy clown!

Michael Damiani

This guy is a scientist ? He says settled science and yet he cannot answer presise scientific questions. Pffft….another charlatan.

RockyRoad

The Fake News MSM represented Nye as a scientist, Forrest. You’ve heard of the long-running program “Bill Nye the Science Guy”, right?

Alan Robertson

Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer, so he has a firm background in science.

Sheri

Rocky Road: That’s “science guy”, not scientist.

RockyRoad

Your explanation, Alan, is like slapping the license plate frame for a Corvette onto a Volkswagen Bug and claiming it’s a performance car.

I didn’t see demonstrable engineering or scientific skills come out of Bill Nye last night; instead, he was condescending, nasty, divisive, and brought up inane talking points to avoid basic questions from Tucker.

I seriously doubt you watched the interview.

Science is defined as the total of physics, chemistry, biology, geology and astronomy. It makes use of mathematics in observations and experiments.

Engineering, on the other hand, applies the principles of engineering, physics, design, construction, maintenance, and many other disciplines depending on the specialization (mechanical, civil, structural, genetic, electrical, and so forth).

You’d be surprised how little “science” is involved in most engineering degrees, Alan.

And you’d be surprised how little “engineering” is involved in most science degrees.

How do I know? I have a BS and MS in geology and a BS and ME in mining engineering. Most of the mining engineers I worked with (and these were very bright people) could care less about the scientific aspects of their world.

Conversely, the scientists I’ve worked with (also bright people) couldn’t build a proper bag in which to put their samples.

I’ve read a lot of comments here that maintain that science = engineering but I disagree. While they both work with similar aspects of the world, their viewpoints come from different perspectives and objectives.

Which brings me back to Bill Nye: He’s such a terrible engineer and such a lame excuse for a scientist I would never take his opinion about global warming; it’s just more alarmist trivia masquerading as truth.

He’s sold his integrity for money and popularity and can be considered dangerous.

Alan Robertson

@RockyRoad-
Please see my earlier post, here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02/27/bill-nye-loses-the-plot/#comment-2438797

As to your response to me… You are correct about Nye’s response.
However, your assertions about engineers not having a science background are flawed. When I took all that chemistry and studied physics of the atom and so forth, I thought that it was a fairly detailed look at science. All engineers have the same background.
Most, if not all of them, will do as I did and have enough math background to intuit solutions to problems beyond their training and to be able to see how explanations for everything boil down to the physics.
That’s the science background of Bill Nye and as I stated in the given link, Nye has made his choice.

Alan Robertson

Ps to RockyRoad:
Apparently, you took my reply to Forrest Gardener as some sort of endorsement of Bill Nye.
Instead, it was an indictment. Bill Nye should know better.
By his statements and actions in the interview, it is apparent to me that he does know better, yet chose the path of the paid propagandist.

Rob Morrow

@Rocky

Most of the mining engineers I worked with (and these were very bright people) could care less about the scientific aspects of their world.

While mining engineers may be mostly concerned with digging holes in the ground, they should still have learned all about geology in their education. They should still have enough knowledge to be skeptical of a doomsday theory based on dubious geology. If they do not, they are technicians, not engineers.

As a mechanical engineer, Nye should have a solid footing in thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, measurement, error analysis, and other concepts relevant to climate science. He’s chosen to ignore science in favour of his own celebrity. That makes him one bad apple. Doesn’t spoil the whole bunch.

Rob Morrow

@Forrest

Nye doesn’t understand science because your thermo and fluids courses were offered by the math department instead of engineering?

There must be a joke in there, but I don’t get it.

Rob Morrow

Fair enough, Forrest. I wish I learned more pure science too. However, I think you’re over complicating the scientific method. It takes very little time to teach. It’s little more than the assumption that our universe has physical laws, and when combined with observation and critical thinking, the notion that we can improve upon what we know and disprove falsehoods we thought we knew. Critical thinking is ultimately what it’s all about, and I don’t believe that can be taught.

Anytime we smell bullshit and follow it up with research we’re practicing part of it. An astute second year mechanical engineering student would look at the confidence range for climate sensitivity and smell something wrong. It spans nearly half an order of magnitude and inspires no confidence.

Nye has the right tools in terms of education, it’s either intelligence or integrity that he lacks.

Rob Morrow

You’re right. Students are allowed to coast for fart too long, as they do, not contributing to the body of science until they get to grad school. I say grade schoolers should be required to submit theses if they expect to progress beyond kindergarten. Putting the cart before the horse means giving the kids a leg up.

Butch

“The climate would be like it was in 1750.” ?? So he wants Humanity to be permanently living in the “Little Ice Age” ? …N.U.T.S. !!

Roger Knights

But IGPOCC says humanity’s CO2 didn’t affect the climate until 1950.

Engineers are fairly good at sifting technical (scientific even) evidence.

The advantage engineers have is that there are consequences for being wrong.

The trouble with climate science is that there are no consequences for being wrong. Well except for economic and environmental consequences. But those are diffuse (relatively).

AP

Engineering is just applied science.

Tim Hammond

No, science is engineering explained.

Juice

Science explains all sorts of things that aren’t engineered though.

Steve R

Holding an undergraduate degree in engineering does not make someone an engineer.

AP: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02/27/bill-nye-loses-the-plot/#comment-2438627

As in my B.Ap.Sc. in Water Resources and Pollution from University of British Columbia Engineering. (Bachelor of Applied Science). And yes, I do differentiate science from engineering. Too bad BN didn’t/doesn’t. An actor on the stage pretending to be a scientist?

(Wonder how those 747 dampers he worked on are working? I think I stick to flights on smaller aircraft. Just kidding.)

Hivemind

“But those are diffuse (relatively).”

More to the point, they are paid for with Other People’s Money. Climate “scientists” can be wrong again and again, and the compliant media will simply give them more publicity. They will never call them out on their failures. This interview with Bill Nye is a very rare exception.

venusnotwarmerduetoCo2

if that guy is an engineer Im a lamppost

What does he claim to have made? a spoon with a hole in perhaps (to thwart warming)

Venus

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Nye

Note: This is a guy who claimed a patent on using a plastic bag full of water as a magnifying glass. Good grief, Charlie Brown!!!!

AP

I apologise on behalf of engineers. If its any consolation, I’ve always thought mechanical engineering degrees lacked a certain something.

The Old Man

@AP: Please. such ad hominin deflections weaken your own otherwise brilliant life’s trajectory. (see what I did there?). Notice to twitter: I’m no fan of the Bee Nee either, but not because he is a graduate mechanical engineer.

chrisretusn

Watch the interview. Funniest I’ve seen in a long time. Bill Nye the clueless guy grasping for straws.

Joe Evans

W
Tucker Carlson was right to back Bill Nye against the wall but Tucker made a mistake in using the term “engineer” in a derogatory manner as if Engineering is somehow inferior to Science. Engineers are trained academically just as intensively or even more so than scientists but with a different focus. Scientists observe the world and attempt to model it. Engineers start with those scientific models to build something useful. If a scientist gets the model wrong it is simply embarrassing. If an engineer gets it wrong, people get hurt. The difference in attitude concerning the real world is stark. Engineers always begin a project with the assumption that the starting models are at best +/- 50% accurate or probably worse. Most engineers would naturally be skeptical of any claim to a 98% consensus. I find that formally trained scientists give the benefit of the doubt to any paper if it has been published, the old peer review thing. Most engineers I know just shake their heads at mere mention of the climate controversy.

tom s

Correct you are.

brians356

I’m an engineer, and I didn’t take offense or feel belittled. Unless you’re a “climate engineer” (Note to self: The Next Big Thing!) you’re never going to be asked or expected to shed light on global climate. But as an engineer, I’m perfectly capable of applying the sniff test to the CAGW hoax, and to spot the obvious failures of climate models.

An engineer: someone who does precise calculations to multiple decimal places based on empirical guesswork using suspect data collected by people with questionable knowledge while under the influence of … and then applies a nice round safety factor based on …

(or any one of the many variations thereof)

My wife and my best friend’s wife used to post shared engineering jokes on the refrigerator for us as they perceived them to be closer to the truth than we would have liked to admit.

I think Bill Nye missed out on the engineering appreciation of humour. On the other hand, watching him …

Steve R

Thank you. I too believe Tucker should not have gone there.

Dave Kelly

I might add that a number of engineers have spent a good deal of their careers in research and development and have more than a few published papers in scientific journals… the line between “engineer” and “scientist” is a blurry one.

Khwarizmi

Carlson wasn’t well equipped to debunk Nye’s propaganda.

============
Nye @ 7:06: “uh,, people who plan to run ski resorts would still be able to do it in Europe
============

Tell us, Bill, how many ski resorts have closed down in Europe due to lack of snow?
Are snowfalls now just a thing of the past, as reported in the Independent UK in 2000?
Or are heavy snowfalls and colder winters now a sign of global warming, as reported in the Independent UK, October 2014?

When climate Scientologists advance two or more contradictory narratives, how do we know which one to believe?

* * * * * * * * * *
Climate change threat to alpine ski resorts
By Graham Tibbetts
Telegraph UK, 21 May 2008
[…]
In some years the amount that fell was 60 per cent lower than was typical in the early 1980s, said Christoph Marty, from the Swiss Federal Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research in Davos, who analysed the records.
I don’t believe we will see the kind of snow conditions we have experienced in past decades,” he said.
* * * * * * * * * *

The Alps have best snow conditions ‘in a generation’
Heavy storms this week mean that skiers will enjoy records amounts of snow in Alpine resorts this Christmas.
By Peter Hardy
Telegraph UK, 19 Dec 2008
* * * * * * * * * *

Samuel C Cogar

The Alps have best snow conditions ‘in a generation’

The Alps sure didn’t have the best snow and ice conditions during the Roman Warm Period.

And the historically recorded facts substantiate that claim simply because, ta dah …….

Hannibal lucked out when he decided to march his army and herd of elephants across the Alps to attack the Romans in 218 BC because there surely could not have been many glaciers or heavy snowpack blocking his route since documented history proves he accomplished that feat.

Read more @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal's_Crossing_of_the_Alps

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/images/Figure4.jpg

tom s

Love it.

John Michelmore

Yes’ and those dinosaurs would not be extinct either, it was us pesky little humans that caused their demise!

It’s appalling that the interviewer clearly knew more than then bogus “science guy”

And when I look at the Central England Temperature record I see plenty of change. As this correlates well with global temperature, it is therefore a good proxy for global temperature. AND CET shows absolutely no unusual change in the modern period.
http://scottishsceptic.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IrishFamines.png

richard verney

Look at the rapid warming between about 1700 and 1730.

Such a rate of warming and change would have modern ‘climate scientists’ having a fit.

What manmade event led to that rapid and significant warming?

Until we can explain our past climate, there is no prospect of properly assessing how climate might in the future change.

Harry Passfield

Richard: That warming from 1700-30 is extremely similar to the late 20thC arming. It would have been a good trick to have shown Nye just that 1700-30 rise (without dates) and get him to comment on it. He would probably think it was the 20thC warming and start putting it all down to FF and GW. I’d pay to see the ‘reveal’.

“warming from 1700-30 is extremely similar to the late 20thC”
is not only similar but also at a faster rate,
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET1690-1960a.gif

Notice the volcanic eruptions in 1739 and 2010 affecting following years temperature, but also that the temperature was already falling during previous 3-4 years. So what might be the reason war this almost identical behaviour?
It coud well be the tectonics of the far North Atlantic (NAT), as the spectral composition coincidence of the tectonic data and the CET is far to close to be a accidental
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-NATspec.gif

richard verney

I have only eyeballed it, but it appears to me that the warming between 1700 to 1730 is faster than the warming of the late 20th Century.

The temperature (smoothed) appears to have risen from about 8.25 to 9.75 degC in just 30 years, This is a rise of 1.5 degC in just 30 years, or about (if extrapolated on a linear basis as is the want of ‘climate science’) 5degC per Century!!

By contrast, the late 20th Century warming shows warming of a little over 1 degC in about the same 30 year period.

Perhaps more remarkable is that within the 1700 to 1730 warming, 1 degC of this warming took place in about the first 15 years, so again on a crazy extrapolation basis, as is the want of ‘climate scientist’ that is a rate of more than 6degC per Century!!

CET has no doubt been compromised by UHI and land change such that the 20th Century record is not as pristine as the earlier 18th Century data.

The point is that there is much (natural) variation, and we have seen similar many times before today. there is nothing remarkable about the late 20th Century.

George Fortune

Nye: 1750: No More Ice Ages. Check out 1790s to 1850s “Bill”.
We are approx half way through an oscillating 42000 year cycle. Approx 21000 yrs for science guys a la Nye. The entry point to the cycle would have been about the time that Woolly Mammoths were becoming extinct during the Great Thaw. Mankind traversed ice bound seas and eventually ended up in Bronze Age – when populations began unprecedented growth. Come on Bill – we have peaked out for a couple of thousand years at the “warm period” and will next be on the down-slope approaching the next Big Ice Age (10000 years or so before it gets really desperate. The signs are already there since cooling, overall has already started. Science Guys for Guy Fawkes [At least one way to keep warm].

Why do many people mess up on the words,ICE AGE ending and starting?

We are currently in a INTER GLACIAL time frame,while we are in the long running 2.6 million Ice Age epoch.

Glaciation = Advancing snow and Ice fields,Cold. Last around 70,000-90,000 years.

Inter Glacial = Declining snow and Ice fields,Warm. Last around 12,000-18,000 years.

Steve R

Sunsettommy,
I believe Prof Nye meant that quite literally. If it were true, that would indeed be good news, huh?

Christopher Bowring

He says that without humans, the climate today would be like it was in 1750. But there was global warming between 1750 to 1800 as we emerged from the Little Ice Age. There was little human activity which could account for that. So why would today’s climate by like 1750 rather than 1800?

Moderately Cross of East Anglia

AP shouldn’t apologise on behalf of any type of engineers, one twit seizing on a chance to become a minor TV personality hardly invalidates a profession that has done so much good for humanity. Hell, even railway engineers have nothing to apologise for despite Pauchudri’ s appalling record.
The real damage Nye has done is in telling nonsense to so many people who have no chance to get the truth about How complex climate studies are and how great the uncertainties. ( I am not an engineer by the way).

willhaas

Bill Nye is not a climate scientist so according to the alarmists he does not have the expertise of offer an opinon regarding climate.

MarkW

The alarmists define scientist as being anyone who agrees with them.

Javert Chip

Obviously, psychologists (Cook, Lewandowsky) and economists and professors of “issues of climate justice” (Torcello) can be climate scientists. Actually, pretty much anybody who doesn’t understand science (and a few who do should; e.g.: Harvard’s Naomi Oreskes) appear to be readily accepted as “climate scientists”.

A few of these guys actually would like to jail people who dare question their opinions. Since there are (as yet) no consequences for teaching these nut-ball opinions to 18-22 year-old students (aka: our kids), soon or later, it’s highly likely someone is actually going to to follow through and attempt to do it.

willhaas

Very few who actually claim to be climate scientists have the formal educational backgoound in climate propoganda to actually be certified climate scientists Many alarmists, instead of arguing the science will argue that one is not a climate scientist and what one is saying goes against the sceintific consensus. I myself would like to use AGW as another reason to conserve on the use of fossil fuels but the AGW conjecture is just too full of holes to defend. When I went to school they did not have the climate change propoganda they force on students today. Instead I have to rely on basic mathematics, chemistry, and physics. I am sorry that I do not belive in the magical powers of CO2. For me that fact that there is no real evidence that the radiant greenhouse effect, that the AGW conjecture is based upon, exists anywhere in the solar system, tends ot make me believe that the AGW conjecture is just some form of sceince fiction. Science in not a democracy so a “scientific consensus” is meaningless and because sceintists never registered and voted on the AGW conjecture the consensus does not really exist.

Ceetee

So from 1750 onwards we selfishly changed the climate with our evil ways. Must have been all that horse manure. Honestly, what a prat.

toorightmate

There is some truth in what Mr Nye has to say.
He is a pest and he wasn’t around in 1750.

TL

A person experiences cognitive dissonance only when he actually believes two irreconcilable things at the same time. Lying is a different thing.

Khwarizmi

Nye’s hysteria about the rate of change went unchallenged by Tucker.

====
“The most spectacular aspect of the YD is that it ended extremely abruptly (around 11,600 years ago), and although the date cannot be known exactly, it is estimated from the annually-banded Greenland ice-core that the annual-mean temperature increased by as much as 10°C in 10 years. ”
http://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/arch/examples.shtml
====

I confronted the alarmists at The Conversation with that example when they were spouting rubbish about the “unprecedented” contemporary rate of change. Then I said,
“And you’re all freaking out about a paltry ~0.8 C…over 100 years!”

I would have thrown the same point at Nye.

Marnof

Absolutely. Nye was grasping for examples, while Carlson could have simply asked him what caused the mile-thick ice that was over New England to disappear, and the ocean to rise 400 feet. Perhaps Native Americans’ use of fire pits was the catalyst.

Gloateus Maximus

Even that alleged 0.8 degrees C is bogus. In uncooked books, using raw, real and reliable data, earth has barely warmed since 1918. It warmed until the 1940s, then cooled dramatically until the late ’70s (leading to renewed ice age worries), warmed slightly for about two decades, and since then has stayed about the same or cooled, but for two super El Nino spikes in 1997-98 and 2015-16.

Graham

“…is so stupid and ill informed that he does not know he is stupid and ill informed.”
My thoughts exactly, Forrest Gardener. What an excruciating dill.
But pity the poor chap. Consistent with your diagnosis, Nye’s seems to be an acute case of the Dunning-Kruger effect, “…a cognitive bias in which low-ability individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability as much higher than it really is. Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a metacognitive incapacity, on the part of those with low ability, to recognize their ineptitude and evaluate their competence accurately.

Gary

Also known as “so far behind he thinks he’s in front.”

venusnotwarmerduetoCo2

I had pencilled Nye in as FXS sufferer

Jer0me

You know the really sad part? Some people think Nye actually won that ‘debate’!
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/02/im-open-minded-youre-not-tucker-carlson-melts-down-after-bill-nye-schools-him-on-climate-change/

“The evidence for climate change is overwhelming,” Nye told an open-mouthed Carlson. “So we’re looking for an explanation for why you guys are having so much trouble with this.”

“I think most people are open to the idea of climate change,” Carlson parried. “The core question, from what I can determine, is why the change?”

Calrlson attempted to get Nye to establish a “degree” to which climate change can be linked to human activity, with Nye backing him up and explaining some basics.

“So the word ‘degree’ is a word that you chose,” Nye patiently explained. “But the speed that climate change is happening is caused by humans. Instead of happening on time scales of millions of years, or let’s say, 15,000 years, it’s happening on a time scale of decades. And now years.”

Juice

If that was Nye patiently explaining something, I’d hate to see him exasperated.

TA

Bill Nye says: “But the speed that climate change is happening is caused by humans.”

Nye presumes to know the speed of climate change, and implies he can measure an increase, and that that increase is caused by humans. Nye couldn’t prove any of this if his life depended on it.

Bill Nye says: “Instead of happening on time scales of millions of years, or let’s say, 15,000 years, it’s happening on a time scale of decades. And now years.”

“It” is happening. So climate change took millions of years to change at one time, and then took 15,000 years to change at a later date (wonder how that change came about without humans), and now it only takes years for the climate to change. There is no scientific basis for any of these claims.

This is why the climate change alarmists chose to use “climate change” rather than “global warming” to describe this phenomenon. That way, as Bill Nye does, they can claim that any change in the weather anywhere on Earth is a change caused by humans, and since the climate is always changing, they have plenty of opportunities to make these claims. They can’t prove any of this, but they can sure make the claim, and they do. Propaganda, pure and simple. Very expensive propaganda.

The good news is they are about to have their comeuppance. Their “science is settled” narrative is about to become undone. Bill Nye on Tucker’s show was just the beginning.

Bill Nye was a weak promoter of CAGW. Tucker should have him back and bring in Marc Marano too, and let them have a nice little discussion. Morano will discuss, and Nye will obfuscate.

kim

The Piltdown Mann’s straight shaft on his Crook’t Stick. This is the Big Lie.

Bill Nye and so many other alarmists have repeated this so often that many of them believe it. It’s what they know that ain’t so.
=================

Paul Nottingham

I know that 1750 in England is supposed to sound cold, but it always surprises me how relatively stable the climate can be over shorter periods. Willis wrote an article with some interesting charts a while back (the words were OK too, Willis) https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/23/maunder-and-dalton-sunspot-minima/ and one of these was a Central England Chart going back further than the standard onecomment image?w=840 Correct me if I’m wrong, but that average temperature in 1750 does not indicate a small, ice-bound island.

These narratives are interesting too http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/1750_1799.htm It sounds as though in the early part of the period it was the winds and rain which were more interesting than anomalous temperatures.

Gloateus Maximus

There were some warm years during the LIA, in between the solar minima and volcanic eruptions. In Manley’s reconstruction of monthly mean CET (1698-1952), January 1740 was the coldest (volcanic effect) and 1916 the warmest:

https://www.rmets.org/sites/default/files/qj53manley.pdf

The Maunder Minimum was the most frigid, but the other three minima–Wolf, Spörer and Dalton–also produced cold decades. Some place the Wolf Minimum (1280-1350) toward the end of the Medieval WP than in the LIA.

D.I.

Paul,
That site (Booty Weather) needs some one to save it from extinction, the Authour advises people to copy the contents before they ‘disappear’.
The ‘Shutdown’ is expected Spring 2017 so grab a copy while you can. Statement here—
http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/wxevents.htm

Johann Wundersamer

Bill Nye, skiing in Europe – what he’s talking about :

http://tv.orf.at/program/orf2/20170205/798410001/story

CheshireRed

So the entire case for ‘catastrophic’ agw now comes down to Midwest pests and beetles in trees? Is that it?

Gloateus Maximus

There are more crop pests because the windmills and solar farms have killed the birds and bats which would have eaten the bugs.

Alan Ranger

So if it weren’t for humans the climate would have been both put on hold from 1750 AND we would be in another ice age by now. Given that, in his ignorance, he meant another glacial, I don’t see how 1750 was a glacial period. Still … he did say the science was settled on this. LOL

fretslider

Oh dear, what an embarrassment the Fake Science Guy is.

Roman vineyards in Britain: stratigraphic and palynological data from Wollaston in the Nene Valley, England

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/roman-vineyards-in-britain-stratigraphic-and-palynological-data-from-wollaston-in-the-nene-valley-england/5FC9D857BAF6B948DAA7DF390889AB71

Incidentally, someone should tell Nye that 1750 was not the best year to cherry pick…

In 1715 the village of Le Pre-du-Bar vanished under a glacier caused landslide. The glacial high tide in the Alps came around 1750 and gradually the glaciers began their retreat, much to the relief of the people who lived there.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/25/glacial-advance-during-the-little-ice-age/

It really was a cringeworthy onterview.

Gloateus Maximus

Scottish vineyard fails:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3424009/Best-stick-Bucky-Scotland-s-vineyard-didn-t-make-wine-year-area-s-rainy.html

The extent of Roman wine grape growing in Lowland Scotland has not been as well surveyed as in England, but there were vineyards on both sides of Hadrian’s Wall. Rome periodically occupied the Lowlands, but the Highlands offered them nothing worth conquering.

Alan C

Vines were grown, and wine was produced, in southern England in the 14th century. Also malaria was a problem in the wet fenlands during this period.

“You’re not even a scientist, you’re an engineer” – what the **** does Carlson mean by that?

Don’t dismiss engineers Carlson, many engineers are sceptics because they realise how ridiculous the concept of ‘global’ temperature is, they realise the implications of the noise (massive daily, regional, seasonal temperature swings) compared the tiny (fractions of a degree per decade) ‘signal’ being sought by climate ‘scientists’. Engineers live in reality, scientists, particularly climate scientists, seem to live in fantasy. I’d put my safety & my future prosperity in the hands of engineers any day rather than scientists based on many idiotic ones I have worked with over the years.

Nye is clearly not an effective engineer, engineering is a fact based endeavour, that’s why planes fly and bridges stay up (usually).

Keith J

Well put. An engineer IS a scientist. That Nye isn’t practicing as one despite formal training is a good thing. Just like Al Gore not preaching despite attending divinity school or Bill Clinton being disbarred for perjury.

The Peter Principle applied.

Kaiser Derden

yes but I think Carlson was trying to do to Nye what the warmists would do to any skeptic engineer … “you are not a climate scientist” …

Javert Chip

jaffa68

Stop getting all huffy about Carlson pointing out that Nye is an engineer, not a scientist. He was applying a reasonable taxonomy, not being insulting.

In point of fact, having a BS in science (e.g.: physics, chemistry) DOES NOT MAKE YOU A TRAINED SCIENTIST – the discipline certainly requires graduate degrees. Having a BS in engineering (any kind) is a different discipline, but certainly does not short circuit the path to “trained scientist”.

This conversation conflating “knowing about the scientific method” (which most STEM educations supply in the freshman year) with actually being a scientist. That’s like saying because I can take my own blood pressure, you’d want me as your cardiovascular surgeon.

DDP

Of course, in typical warmist fashion when losing an argument that you can’t support because you have no facts to back it, bring out the old ‘what about the children?’ BS.

So this is an individual who believes living with hunger, disease and poverty as a result of decreased global temperature is somehow better than rising by less than a couple of degrees to where it was a few hundred years before 1750. I really don’t think he the right person to lecture anyone on cognitive dissonance and irrational beliefs.

And it amazes me, amazes, that someone who is supposed to be intelligent can fail so miserably to understand that climate is a chaotic system and has repeatedly changed, quite often rapidly since the end of that same ice age he constantly pointed to. That is based on evidence, and not a computer model. But then models only go up, which seems to be this belief. He just ignores the (historically repeated) drop in temperatures that allowed for a rebounding rise in the first place. Which would have happened after 1750 regardless of the industrial age or not, as it had done before

Complete tosser, and an aggressive one at that. But he is a useful idiot, and the more idiotic he is the more he is ignored. He doesn’t discuss, and he really doesn’t argue. He just makes statements, and then claims that everyone is wrong to disagree with him because they are irrational. He doesn’t listen to anyone or their point because he thinks he is above everyone else and their ability to process information, after all, he is ‘the Science Guy’.

Javert Chip

DDP

People like Nye get in this game because it allows them to claim they are part of saving the world (leads to fame, fortune, respect and authority). I have to think that once on “the team”, even these useful idiots see the shabby process & thin evidence, and have doubts about the underlying premise.

However, once you have positioned yourself as savior of humanity and begin to exert real power over millions of people (e.g.: extracting billions in taxes to remediate warming; publicly discussing jailing doubters), the vast majority of acolytes will never back off – this much power is absolutely intoxicating, regardless if it’s founded on pure crap.

urederra

NYE: “The climate would be like it was in 1750. And the economics would be that you could not grow wine-worthy grapes in Britain as you can today
>/blockquote>

So, is this a bad thing?
Or is he admitting that humans have changed the climate for the better?

urederra

ouch, sorry, I did not close the quote properly.

Poor Richard

Please notice at 4:54 in the video above that we — apparently — have prevented another ice age. It makes me feel all tingly and powerful.

I think we all deserve a raise, or at least a large hot fudge sundae.

In the meantime, I’m not selling my winter coat.

pdovernetcomukcouk

Just looking quickly for vineyards in Britain in the Eighteenth century. Here are two quotes from within 50 years of 1750:

‘Oct. 18th 1765. I went to see Mr. Roger’s vineyard, at Parson’s Green, all of Burgundy grapes, and seemingly all perfectly ripe. I did not see a green half-ripe grape in all this great quantity. He does not expect to make less than fourteen hogsheads of wine. The branches and fruit are remarkably large, and the vines very strong.'”

and from the 1790s

Epsom is an extremely pleasant well-built town, surrounded with good land, pretty fields, and plenty of trees, without being an incumbrance. Here I spent two or three days in the most agreeable manner, at the house of the Rev. J. BOUCHER, rector of this place. The elegant house, gardens, and pleasure grounds occupied by this gentleman, are his own property, and are planned with a degree of taste and neatness, not often equalled: his collection of plants is large, and curious; and besides all the common sorts of fruit, there is scarcely a wall which does not support the spreading vine, covered with clusters of grapes.

hunter

Bill Nye, the lying science guy, is not even a good engineer. He is a political hack pretending to be an educator who became a performer pretending to be a scientist. The idea that *anyone* knows what the climate would be like without humans is a laugh. And since wine grew in Britain before 1750, how dare he claim that is a bad thing. And pine bark beetles are more likely due to the stress caused trees by the over crowding due to fire fighting strategies that prevents too many fires. Good for Tucker Carlson.

Bill Marsh

I’m missing something and I think Carlson missed it as well.

If Nye doesn’t know how much of ‘climate change’ is due to human influence, how can he logically claim that, without human influence, the climate would be just as it was in 1750? Isn’t that a ‘back door’ claim that ALL ‘climate change’ since 1750 is due to human influence and human influence alone? It’s an absurd claim to begin with.

Would have loved to see Carlson point that out.

Gloateus Maximus

Carlson has to do BG research on a variety of topics. Better would have been, IMO, to have a skeptical expert reply to Bill (de)Nye the Bow-Tied Boob.

But Carlson could have done enough research or been briefed by staff that climate underwent drastic changes before and after AD 1750 without any help from humans. It warmed more rapidly and for longer coming out of the Maunder Minimum depths of the LIA (the early 18th century warming, c. 1690 to 1740) than it has since 1977, when the postwar cooling ended.

Most of the warming since the end of the LIA c. 1850 also happened before CO2 took off after WWII (with no warming effect for at least 32 years).

And do we have a Neanderthal industrial age to thank for the Eemian Interglacial, much warmer and longer lasting than our present Holocene to date?

Jerry Henson

I believe Carlson’s point about Nye being an engineer was that AGW types
usually argue that you have no right to speak on the subject if you are not
a scientist of the type which they approve.

BTW, didn’t the Romans leave England ~400 AD because they could no
longer grow wine grapes?

Gloateus Maximus

That and all the Germanic, Iranian and other barbarians invading more important parts of the empire like Gaul, Italy, Hispania, Africa and the Balkans.

Not that withdrawing from Britannia in AD 410 did much good. The Visigoths sacked Rome in August of that very year. The Vandals in 455 and Ostrogoths in 546 finished the job. By then Germanic raiders had occupied eastern and southern Britain, while Picts (from Scotland) and Scots (from Ireland) ravaged its north and west. Worse was yet to come for the remains of the empire, in the form of Norse and Muslim invaders. These weren’t climate refugees but climate opportunists.

However, at least some vineyards survived in the Mediterranean region.

drednicolson

The Romans withdrew from Britain several times, typically when the legions stationed there were needed elsewhere. They would then return when the crisis was over. Circa. 400 AD was when they departed for good.

commieBob

Bill Nye showed incredible hubris by agreeing to talk with Tucker Carlson. Does he not realize that some people might actually be hostile to him? Does he not give credit to the idea that some of those people will be highly competent? Apparently not.

One of the reasons that alarmists refuse to debate with skeptics is that the alarmists usually lose. Bill Nye may have missed that little detail.

Of course 1 billion people would be starving and our forests would be much smaller and less dense worldwide without the extra co2. In addition of course if we had not burned all that co2 since 1750 most of us would be dead or not born because civilization as we know it would be nonexistent.

In addition of course none of what he said would be true because co2 isn’t the reason the world warmed from 1750. It was recovering from the LIA.

RAH

It is the diagnosis of this former SF medic that Bill Nye is suffering from Cerebrovascular ischemia of the global form probably resulting from wearing his bowtie too tight for so many years. It is irreversible and as long as the guy keeps wearing his bowtie too tight he will increasingly sound like peewee Herman discussing climate or any other science.

Unfortunately however bad he is on climate – he’s even worse on energy related issues.

Tucker cannot be an expert on everything, so please hold your fire. Remember, he is a layman, but he is fearless and smart as a whip.

He excels on calling idiots and deranged Leftists out on their inconsistencies and BS.

It was sooooooo much fun to watch him laugh at, and ridicule this fool.

Can anyone here imagine that airhead MeGYN Kelly even approach his level of intelligence and doggedness?  I don’t think so.  He is absolutely *destroying” her in comparable ratings.

I watch him and Lou Dobbs every night. They are only two shows on Faux News that are worth anything at all.

Keith J

Tucker holds a degree in history, not journalism. I guess he could have insight on historical climate 😉

Mike

Mr. Nye must be a ‘Social Engineer’ or a Surface Engineer (floor polishing etc.) he clearly missed out on Thermodynamics.

>>
. . . he clearly missed out on Thermodynamics.
<<

While getting my EE degree, all engineers were required to take thermodynamics. The required class was only offered by the ME department. I guess ME Nye missed that class.

Jim

Keith J

I knew a fellow grad student in mechanical engineering who thought it possible to split water using electrical current generated by burning the produced hydrogen AND harnessing useful work as a by product. How? Adding acid to the water would increase hydrogen concentration, in his limited chemistry background. Mind you, hydrogen ion (hydronium) concentration isn’t molecular hydrogen but he wouldn’t learn.

Yes, he passed undergrad thermo somehow…