From the “if Bill’s genitals could talk, what would they say?” department…and Josh.
First up, Bill led the march for science with Mike Mann recently….
…and then had a bizarre episode of his Netflix show that immediately followed. From Natural News:
In his latest plunge into quack science lunacy, Bill Nye has teamed up with Rachel Bloom in a vulgar, laughably embarrassing, science-excoriating “transgender anthem” video called “Sex Junk.” The song’s lyrics, which promote the whacked-out myth that human sex expression is not binary, include lines like, “Sex how you want, it’s your goddamn right.”
Another line from the vulgar song goes like this, while Bill Nye gyrates in the background:
This world of ours is so full of choice. But must I choose between only John or Joyce? Are my options only hard or moist? My vagina has its own voice.
The song goes on to claim that transgenderism is all part of “evolution” … an assertion that has real scientists cringing everywhere.
After the cringe-worthy song finished, Bill Nye sums up his lunacy by stating, “That’s exactly the right message, Rachel, nice job!” If Charles Darwin were still alive today, he would no doubt squash Bill Nye with a giant Galapagos tortoise.
“The video was quickly excoriated by viewers, with the YouTube version receiving more than 10,000 dislikes compared with just 170 likes,” reports Breitbart News.
Yikes.
Josh has two takes on it:
Then, after his vulgarity video espousing sexual choice, he lectures us on having less children to save the planet:
Even certified warmists like Andrew Freedman are now questioning his credibility in the climate cause, citing this story:
Bill Nye Is Not the Right Guy to Lead the Climate Fight
Finally, a solid story takes on the damage Bill Nye is having on climate science discussions https://t.co/9ypPxmdbad
— Andrew Freedman (@afreedma) April 27, 2017
The implosion has begun -the end is Nye
That New Republic piece brings up a point I’ve missed. What is the reasoning behind catastrophists’ emphasis on the rate of CO2 increase?
I understand that the biosphere might plausibly be slow to adjust to, and thus sequester, CO2, so the response of the atmospheric concentration to emissions may depend on how fast emissions increase. The relevance to warming of how fast the concentration increases puzzles me, though.
I don’t understand how the warming in response to a given concentration would depend on how fast that concentration increased–except that a faster concentration increase would initially result in less warming for a given concentration, since the warming would lag the concentration more.
I’m assuming they have a theory that’s plausible, but so far I haven’t heard it. Can anyone fill me in?
I’ve never heard any theory on this, merely unjustified pronouncements from our betters. Sounds like complete BS to most sensible people, and in any case we just don’t have the resolution from any proxies that could prove the rate of increase of temperatures or CO2 in the past anyway.
Thanks. Your experience matches mine; it sounded to me as though it was just one of those things that impresses small children and reporters but needn’t detain critical thinkers. Still, I was attempting to keep an open mind.
The theory is that warming is pretty much immediate with CO2 concentration. This is called transient warming.
Equilibrium warming is the stable air temperature that results after the CO2 concentration ceases to increase and stabilizes to a constant value.
The top of the transient warmth decreases slowly as the ocean takes up some of the heat, until a new equilibrium stable temperature is reached.
At least, that’s the way the models show it.
Whether it’s a crock or not is unknowable, because the models are so loaded with error that their air temperature projections have no physical meaning.
Thanks a lot.
This is actually the first time I’ve heard that they model the systems as what in some circles is called “underdamped” : the system can overshoot. (In linear models, overshoot requires that the order be second or higher; a “one-box” system won’t exhibit that behavior.)
I haven’t done the math yet, but it sounds as though such overshoot would require that a significant part of the ocean warming occur by conduction from the land. (The land will heat up quickly but then cool some as it equilibrates slowly with the ocean.)
That seems unlikely. The radiative “damping” seems too strong. But maybe I just don’t understand the purported mechanism yet.
Since I improvidently wrote “yet” when I mentioned doing the math, I went back and did it.
I computed a simple “two-box” linear model in which one box is the land, the other is the ocean, and, to give the model the best chance of overshoot, incoming radiation is applied directly only to the land, with the ocean receiving energy only from the land by conduction. (Land and ocean both lose energy to space and directly to space.)
It turns out that no set of parameters can lead to overshoot in such a model. That a simple two-box linear model fails to support a rate argument doesn’t by itself mean no plausible model could, of course. But to me it makes the catastrophists’ rate argument puzzling.
Bill Nye has a BS in mechanical engineering and he doesn’t understand how a swamp cooler works?
The reviews on Netflix are a joy to read.
Mr Science Nut is the top contender for climate change King, I can’t believe he’s making Gore and Mann look some what rational.NOT!
http://nypost.com/2017/04/26/bill-nye-should-we-penalize-parents-for-having-extra-kids/
“he lectures us on having less children to save the planet”
In the past, 5 civilizations have become extinct due to climate change. So if the planet’s population is increasing it must illustrate there is not a climate problem.
Good one Bill.
Bill Nye is a [snip]
That snip was EXCELLANT! Readers can attribute their favorite pejorative. I wish I thought of it!!
That [snip] Bill Nye should keep his [snip]’n [snip] in a [snip] and [snip] [snip] a medical waste container.
I suspect that at least one of those “[snip]”s is meant to be literal?
So mass extinction isn’t caused by asteroid impacts or anything like that. No. It’s caused by everyone turning liberal.
Liberals and asteroids.
Liberals have squandered trillions on the Green Scheme and the nonexistent threat of man-made “climate change”, while mere billions could provide adequate defense of the earth against mass extinction-sized asteroids, a very real existential threat. It has a low annual chance of occurring but will eventually, with the direst of consequences.
It’s threads like this that make me miss Griff – he understood this stuff at a DNA level.
Love your stuff, Josh, but I’m a bit of a grammar geek:
“…..so we can save the planet….for whoM?”
I believe dative case is proper here.
Other than that, the image is fabulous !! Thanks !!
This is what happens when Leftists replace empirical laws of science and natural laws of human ethics, with with moral, ethical and empirical relativism…
Under Leftist relativism, eventually, the entire society and culture collapses in chaos. The only “Truth” is what the State decides is Policslly Correct… There is no longer the concept of factually correct, only those things that are Politically Correct are allowed to exist by the state…. (see Berkeley).
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Leftism is approaching a point of singularity where either it destroys everyone, or it destroys itself and its ideologies are finally rejected…
Nye and Mann may be examples of what science should NOT be, BUT they own the microphones, they hog the media, they appeal to the masses. They have all the keys. As long as they have the keys (ie appeal to the masses) we don’t stand a chance. This all-too familiar situation will keep on playing out like this until the we the “deniers”, wrest the keys away from these frauds.
Perhaps we should start a fund, hire some seriously charismatic personae who also see the climate fraud, and start turning things around by mass appeal, court cases, government lobbying, senate education, network enlisting and so on. We can’t win by just pointing to the evidence. That’s not how it works in these fake news times. You have to blow big bucks.
Death by increments. If nobody in your peer group tells you you are a tool (for fear of being non PC) then you just keep going further and further. He is arrogant , knows he is saving the planet and is surrounded by sycophants and hangers on. Its inevitable at some stage the wheels will fall off.
I thought Rachel Bloom in Crazy Ex-Girlfriend was just acting as an (insufferable, mentally unstable) over-the-top character. Now it seems it’s more like she was playing herself.
Well, he has never done anything but dance around shaman style with an animal mask…
I expected this post to include quotes about “extra children” which Nye apparently mentioned too.
I am not personally acquainted with Bill Nye, which is not a disappointment. The Democratic establishment will continue to promote him. On Thursday 27 April 2017 in Australia, the nationally broadcast ABC science show quoted the gem from a participant in the so called “March for Science”: “This government is an authoritarian, fascist government.” Another contribution: “Trump is Mussolini re-incarnated”. It may be a very long time before wisdom vanquishes ignorance.
Hmmmm …. anyone else notice that “Natural News” is also into the anti-vaccine set, calling vaccination anti-science? I do worry sometimes where WUWT is going, c-trails next on this site, is it?
Bill Nye’s lunacy reminds me of that former science teacher who dressed up as a court jester and pretended he was a great climate science “communicator”. He also finally went crazy if I recall. To be kind, one could describe Bill Nye as the sort of guy one would watch very closely when around children….
The trouble is Nye is only reflecting the current ‘mainstream’ insane SJW/liberal views. They are all barking. In the UK we just had days of the Lib Dem leader Tim Farron (pretty horrid bloke, but I digress) being relentlessly hounded. He previously said he did not believe homosexuality is a sin (he is a Christian). But that was not good enough for the SJWs, they wanted confirmation that he didn’t think gay sex is a sin either. In the end, at the risk of his position becoming untenable, he was effectively forced to positively endorse sodomy. This is the world we live in!
Yo, Bill….
I have 8 wonderful children, all productive; all smart (two daughters in grad school right now).
Yes, EIGHT!
(That ought to make his head explode!)
Make no mistake about it, Bill Nye is a gifted communicator. He has had a very successful career as a comedian and actor because of this. This is the kind of person that you want to be a spokesman for your cause or product/business.
He combined this with his interest and knowledge in science into a successful kids show “Bill Nye the science guy” . So far so good for him and those being entertained or educated by this actor/entertainer.
Clearly, Nye has some extremely liberal views. Whether you disagree with his views or not does not matter, he has a right to them. However, when he stepped over the line of what I would consider scientific integrity, is when he decided to use his tv persona as a scientist to portray himself as a climate science expert.
At first, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is capable of understanding the physical laws of the atmosphere and could have done some self taught research. Certainly there are those that disagree with me on elements of climate science that have more schooling(I only have a BS in atmospheric/oceanic science), so Nye deserved a chance.
When he was interviewed on live television deflate gate and showed clearly that he had no clue about the ideal gas law, he was exposed as a fraud with regards to presenting himself as an expert in understanding atmospheric science.
http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2015/01/bill-nye-drops-ball-on-deflategate.html
Before and since then, he has memorized thousands of creative, intelligent and convincing sounding ways to express his alarmism about climate change, some with a grain of truth. However, most of it is just based on him using his image and political belief to impose the same belief in those that don’t understand climate science…………which is almost everybody.
So he can be extremely effective. Him going off the deep end in a video like this may cause actual scientists to chuckle at this silly pretend scientist and result in credibility attacks from those that disagree with him but the media and those that he represents know how powerful his name and communication skills are.
It’s not like he was busted doing something illegal. Who didn’t know that he had extremely liberal views and had a zany personality. How many comedians do you know that are also serious scientists? OK, I actually do know a couple but in this case, Nye is not really a scientist.
He has the right to be this way and have his views of course and still can come across to one side, that is only looking at reinforcing a belief system……. as a famous name with perceived scientific credentials(fraudulent when applied to the climate).
Some people might perceive his bizarre behavior as being that of an eccentric scientist that thinks different than the rest of us. Or, contrast that with a dead serious authentic climate scientist like Richard Lindzen, who has the credentials and comprehensive understanding to make authoritative comments.
How many people know Dr. Lindzen(especially outside of the present company)? How many know Bill Nye the science guy?
So combine popularity with religion, ignore rationality, and that equates to “climate science”. It all makes sense now.
[img]https://img.memecdn.com/bill-nye-the-photoshop-guy_o_5623983.webp[/img]
I can’t say I’m surprised that a “climate scientist” who denIes natural climate change also is also in favor of those who would denIe their natural gender.
Is what is at the root of all the “save the environment”, “Earth Day”, etc, movements actually natural?
It’s the bits between your ears that’s important…not the bits between your legs.
In Bill Nye’s case he fails in both areas.
He’s desperate. He’s jumped the shark.