Redditers Rip Apart Bill Nye’s Totally Incoherent Answers In AMA
By Mike Bastasch at the Daily Caller
Redditers were not fans of the answers Bill Nye “the science guy” gave in an AMA, grilling the former children’s show host for dodging questions and giving inaccurate answers.
Nye held the AMA on Wednesday to promote his upcoming documentary. Nye says his goal is to end “anti-scientific thinking,” but Reddit users were left less than satisfied with answers the science guy gave to their questions.
Right off the bat Nye got hit for saying 3 Kelvins was “toasty warm, referring to the temperature of space. One savvy commenter noted 3 Kelvins is about the same as -454 degrees Fahrenheit.”
Screenshot: Reddit
In fairness, Nye may have been joking, but Reddit wasn’t having any of it.
Redditers also went after Nye for getting the facts wrong regarding a recent lawsuit filed against the National Academy of Science and various researchers for criticizing a paper written by Stanford University professor Mark Jacobson. Nye also gave some disagreeable answers about nuclear power.
Screenshot: Reddit
Jacobson filed suit against the Academy and authors of a study that debunked his own 2015 study claiming the U.S. could be powered with 100 percent green energy. The rebuttal found Jacobson relied on faulty modeling, so the Stanford professor is suing them for $10 million.
Redditers couldn’t resist going after Nye for saying science is “true whether you believe it or not.” Commenters quickly pointed to Nye’s less-than-scientific claim that gender is a spectrum, and not binary.
Screenshot: Reddit
Curiously, Nye also told Reddit users that belief in the “deep state” was the most harmful science-based conspiracy theory out there.
The phrase “deep state” gained popularity among conservatives this year as a way to describe powerful, unaccountable and veiled government institutions, like the CIA. It’s not at all a science-based idea.
Screenshot: Reddit
Things hit a fever pitch when Nye apparently gave the wrong explanation for a basic physics question.
Screenshot: Reddit
Nye also gave a weirdly obscure answer to a Redditer who asked which politicians the science guy believes he’s influenced the most.
Screenshot: Reddit
I think they were too critical…..for instance the 3 Kelvin was obviously a joke
That is an assumption, not reality.
If Bill Nye chooses to respond with bogus answers to science questions, then Bill Nye is wrong on all counts.
Note that Nye did not expand or otherwise qualify his answer. He answer was and absurdity and then Nye was quite happy to leave the answer as absurd. “Toasty!
Nonsense! I think Nye is a condescending snob with delusions of grandeur who loves being surrounded by sycophants. However, his 3 Kevin comment was obviously sarcasm.
If a friend comes inside from subzero weather and you ask him, “How cold is it?” And if he responds by saying, “It’s not that cold. It’s only minus 10. Toasty.” Do you really believe he’s being absurd and is serious?
Jim
He actually answered the question….just threw in a little levity at the end….i sort of liked the response
Kinky!
You distract from the topic by adding new conditions so you can add your personal perspective.
Nye is answering questions from basically unknown questioners at unknown locations.
There is no “comes inside from subzero weather”! Everyone is sitting in warm well lit indoor spaces.
In the “Nye answers all questions” context, Nye’s answer is completely bogus and guaranteed to baffle everyone who does not already positively know:
• What 3 Kelvin means,
• That space is utterly cold,
• That toasty has zero meaning in any description of space, kelvin, Celsius or Fahrenheit.
See above response to Jim.
You’re allowed to like anything Nye says.
Nye’s levity is only known to people who already understand and know the reality of space and kelvin temps.
Your like Nye answers does not make any answer Nye gives correct, accurate, on topic or even close to reality.
Now there’s a false premise!
Add in new context:
• “Friend”,
• “comes inside from subzero weather”, indicating immediacy of the cold,
That is known as a false strawman. You add your fake personal context so you can make some sense of Nye’s answer.
The correct context is Nye and his questioners are all sitting in protected, likely warm well lit interior spaces.
It is also extremely likely that many of Nye’s audience does not know or understand the Kelvin scale; 3°K means zilch to them.
Most of that audience likely has only a small understanding of Celsius or Fahrenheit.
The same can likely be said regarding audience member understanding of space.
Toasty, means zilch when discussing space, Kelvin, Celsius, or Fahrenheit.
Any joke or humor expressed by Nye in that answer under that context is condescending and ridiculing his audience. As that humor is meant for the insiders.
See my response to Jim above.
Nye did not answer the question so people who are learning have any idea what Nye is going on about.
Any levity Nye introduces is strictly for knowledgeable insiders.
A technique guaranteed to frustrate/baffle people who are trying to learn/understand.
Insider levity is a technique used to ridicule and demean those outsider folks.
You are welcome to like anything Nye states.
That does not make his answers correct.
Obvious to Bill Nye believers, not so much the rest of the world.
I’m not a bill Nye believer. Just a realist who can see a joke when said. bill has to know that 3 k is just above absolute zero. He’s an engineer and has this training.
We have our own Bill Nye in Australia too – Dr Karl Kruszelniki.
Dr Karl works mainly as a science educator and broadcaster on the government-owned media networks – the ABC. And guess what – he has serious problems with basic science as well.
He stood for the federal Senate back in 2007 for the far-left Climate Change Coalition. He had to withdraw from the race when he was caught exaggerating scientific effects when he was unable to divide two numbers correctly.
Perhaps not surprisingly, he is a climate change fanatic and a great supporter of renewable energy. It figures.
That this fool would in anyway be seen as a replacement for or substitute for Mr Wizard is to illustrate exactly what is wrong with our educational system and to explain the ease with which so many are led astray.
That this fool would in anyway be seen as a replacement for or substitute for Mr Wizard is to illustrate exactly what is wrong with our educational system and to explain the ease with which so many are led astray.
Bill Nye should restrict his science talks to elementary school science.
Such as:
– Put a balloon in hot water to watch it expand, ice water to water it contract.
– Mix vinegar and baking soda to make that evil magic gas.
– Use electric current in water to make oxygen and hydrogen bubbles form at the electrodes.
Anything beyond that level of science and he’s over his head.
And everyones favourite, acid base titration using phenolphthalein indicator
Even these basic experiments would be suspect coming from the “Science Guy” who faked the “CO2 retains heat” results on live TV.
Nye is suing Disney for 100x his pay as a human animatronic. The words he spoke were written for him.
Off topic but related:
The climate extremists are cycling back to psychological explanations for skeptics:
https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/energy-and-environment/2017/11/10/16627256/conservatives-climate-change-persuasion
It is fascinating but at the same time disturbing to watch how self righteousness can self blind someone like the author.
Bill Nye was trained as an engineer, not a scientist. My father, who was trained as a physicist and worked an entire career as an aerospace engineer and a contemporary of Werner von Braun (yes, “rocket science”!) told me “It is easy for a scientist to work as an engineer. It is impossible for an engineer to work as a scientist.”
It is not a question of scientists vs engineers.
It is a question of logic vs emotion, ideology vs objective reality, truth vs fiction, smart vs dumb, talking points vs actual knowledge, and correct vs wrong as wrong can be.
In no particular order, and depending on the person.
Depends on how you define engineer. A lot of engineers are also successful scientists! However, it’s not about engineers or scientists but about using your brain or just your memory.
I have hilariously destroyed Nye et al, on all his youtube vids about the magical gaissiness what dun made a cold nitrogen bath conduction chilling a sun-warmed rock, uh… big ol’ magic heater.
All inversion scammers despise reference to the thermodynamics violations their fraud repeatedly demands they create. He’s no exception.
Ever seen a magic gasser who wanted to discuss the gas laws? Of course not. The main one formally, mathematically names CO2 and standard atmospheric mix, and assigns CO2 the lower energy containment in all calculations.
Remember it was magic gassers who gave their hick fraud such a bad name. We honest scientists just caught and ridiculed them.
Did NO One notice that billie-boi said ‘rocket surgery’?
Would you have preferred he said “brain science”?!
/grin
THAT is an old joke. He should get a pass on that one.
Hockey fans should be familiar with the term supposedly coined by commentator Don Cherry.
Climate Science has been beaten so much in the head by a hockey stick it now needs a brain surgeon?
I went to Nye’s youtube videos about the Magical. Conservation of Energy Violating Gassiness
and burned down his and his ignoratti followers’ fraud-based world.
About as good as that other alarminista Brian Cox’s answer to a kid about how the phases of the moon occur.
Well, are you going to tell us what that was?
OK, I looked it up.
But we already knew he was no shining intellect.
Off script is when you find out what people really know.
His later denials of really thinking that, writing it off to a long day, is clearly a lie meant to salvage some credibility.
It is plain as day…Nye, Cox, and that other guy, Neil DegrasseTyson…these guys are not very knowledgeable.
Here: Cox’s answer to a grade-schooler’s question (what causes the phases of the moon) was ‘the shadow of the Earth’. https://motls.blogspot.com/2012/03/brian-cox-and-lunar-phases.html
He tried to undo that in 2012 by explaining himself here: http://blogs.scienceforums.net/swansont/archives/11081
(do a name search in the comments)
Well, I’ve sat through several lunar eclipses into totality, photographed them, and I have yet to find that the Earth’s shadow gives the Moon a ‘banana shape’. It does give it a sort of rosy mauve color, but at 2AM, with an aching back I have to give up and head for my trundle bead. And people photograph these total lunar eclipses whenever they happen, so it’s not just me rattling on.
You guys frequently try to catch me up in a comment, you know. But I’m a layman, not a scientist, so I have no degree to protect from scrutiny.
Maybe the grant money machine needs to be wound down. It’s gotten out of hand.
Grant money? you’re as dumb as a brick. There is no money in science.
What’s an AMA?
‘ask me anything’. ie, online format for taking questions from an audience.
Down here, AMA stands for Australian Medical Association..
When it come to climate science, they are sort of at a ‘Bill Nye’ level !!
Bow ties on Nye are not cool!
Only if you are really good looking.
Mick,
And wearing a tuxedo, and have cufflinks with “007” engraved on them.
Nye was interviewed yesterday on NPR.
“…..Redditers couldn’t resist going after Nye for saying science is “true whether you believe it or not.” Commenters quickly pointed to Nye’s less-than-scientific claim that gender is a spectrum, and not binary…..”
Ummm, apparently there are people who are unaware that the Left has created a total of 63 genders as defined in the link below. This is perhaps what Nye is referring to when he says that gender is a “spectrum”.
https://apath.org/63-genders/.
Don’t you just love it when Leftist ideologies decide what’s true and what isn’t true in science?
H/T to Tucker Carlson at Fox News for bringing this to my attention when he mentioned it on his show one night.
Just remember that when Stalin ruled the roost, 2 + 2 = 5.
2.4 + 2.4 = 4.8
Now round those figures up by 1 decimal place to get:
2 + 2 = 5
QED!
Round two down, one up.
The funny thing is, Nye covered gender on his “Science Guy” show. The spectrum wasn’t there. Conveniently, it has been removed from reruns/Netflix.
The reaction in that last screen shot reminds me of someone lol
Science is true wither you believe it or not, trust me I’m a rocket surgeon!
[‘Tis true that, with greater cold, the weather will wither on every vine whether you believe in it or knot. .mod]
*whether
It’s all brain enginery stuff that will probably end up becoming a witch pursuit type thingy.
dumb as a bag of hammers … (assuming the hammers are having an off day … )
to Jim Masterson nov 11 @9:41.
you’re wrong. the 1s orbital wave function is at its highest at the nucleus. Therefore the most probable place to find the electron is at the nucleus. you are confusing probable distance from the nucleus which is at its highest at the Bohr radii to probability in unit space.
Experimentally this has been shown for other s orbitals in other elements in perturbations to the nuclear energy levels through gamma resonance techniques. For further explanations to this topic read NN Greenwood an T Gibb’s 1970’s text on Moessbauer spectroscopy.
>>
you’re wrong. the 1s orbital wave function is at its highest at the nucleus.
<<
I distinctly remember the electron probability is zero at the nucleus for all orbitals in the hydrogen atom.
Jim
jim, the probability is not zero at the nucleus. just look up a wavefunction. your logic goes
the centre has zero volume so at the point in the centre there is no volume so there is no probability. all points have zero volume so the electron cannot be at any point !
however the nucleus has a finite volume and so has a probability of an electron being there. for s orbitals the highest value for a wavefunction is at the nucleus hence the highest probability per unit volume is at the nucleus. the most probable distances are at the Bohr radii because we have multiplied by r^2. however the Bohr radius has zero volume and so cannot hold an electron! you must use probability per unit volume and then the nucleus has the highest value. that is in the first few pages of atomic theory
Look it up before commenting!
JIM I have just seen where you are getting your misconception. you are equating radial probability graphs with probability. they are not the same
probability is say p ( and is proportional to wavefunction^2) then radial probability = p.r^2
when r =0 then radial probability is zero that simply means that at a point of no volume, the probability is zero.
the probability is zero at ALL other points. It is zero at the Bohr radius because it does not have a volume
You need the probability per unit volume which is at its highest at the nucleus – yes it appears we have divided zero by zero.
or you go to the wavefunction^2
yes confused
try reading
chemistry.mcmaster.ca/esam/chapter_3/section_2.html
its written for chemists so you should be able to understand it
Bill Nye is why I sadly let my membership of The Planetary Society lapse after a couple of decades or more as a member. I will not rejoin while he continues to lead it.
Just another hopeless joke exposed. The problem is he remains a dangerous hopeless joke because as a fanatic he redoubles his efforts as his hopelessness is exposed.
HR, you may think he needs to be stifled now, but it is better to let him run off at the mouth and make a complete fool of himself in a public venue than to stifle him. He can’t answer simple questions and as embroiled himself in some very distasteful arguments, such as those about gender, among other things. He is less a danger than what he is turning into, a public joke just like Algore.
He’s become a cartoon creature of his own making, but there are plenty people who can disprove what he says. Please do not give up.
Nye is too ignorant to understand what people mean when they say gender is a spectrum, but so are many folks arguing with him. Any biology undergrad could help him them that if they bothered to ask.
There are several possible interpretations. One that is easy to understand is purely genetic. At the highest level of genome structure, one sees a whole spectrum of chromosome abnormalities, such as chromosome deletions or polysomy. Chromosomes can be missing large chunks or spliced with parts of other chromosomes. Sex chromosomes are no exception; they can be clobbered in all the same ways. For example, the deletion of the long arm of Y-chromosome is common enough to notice. So when you hear somebody say that there are only two genders, XX and XY, ask what he wants to call X, XYY, or XXXYY. The proper linguistic interpretation of the “two genders” claim is that there are two normal genders. We can all agree on that. Problems arise when people insist on calling everything that survives birth on the fringe of viability “normal”, then find themselves in consternation over what to call it.
http://www.wikilectures.eu/w/Disorders_of_the_Sex_Chromosomes
The next category of “spectrum generation” that is less easy to understand to a non-biologist is everything that can go wrong in development. Most developmental abnormalities are caused by genomic mutations, but even a completely normal genome can fail to express properly, and even properly expressed, parts that need to come together in a certain order can fail to assemble. The possibilities for things to go wrong are endless; however, some of the most bizarre ones get automatically aborted in utero. My favorite example of a feature that produces a continuous spectrum of effects is the sensitivity of androgen receptor, which can vary from zero to very high. Genetically, it is determined by the length of glutamine repeat that can vary from several units (highly sensitive) to more than a hundred (completely insensitive). On the sensitive end, you get an extremely expressed male phenotype — large, muscular, hairy and aggressive — that quickly dies of prostate cancer. One the insensitive end, a normal, non-pathological XY karyotype (see above) fails to develop most parts of male anatomy and instead develops and behaves as a female. You can still call him a man but he does not look like a man, does not sound like a man, does not behave like a man, and he is infertile. There is a bit of cognitive dissonance there. Normal fertile men fall somewhere between these extremes, and the degree to which normal male phenotype is expressed varies with race.
So don’t hit the man for saying outrageous things; that one wasn’t at all outrageous. The outrage is that he says it without having a clue about what it means and is unable to explain it when challenged.
Thing is, Gene, etymologically speaking, the term ‘gender’ comes from the Latin ‘generare’ which means generate, basically, in the make babies sense . . And is synonymous with “sex”, in most dictionaries . . As in, one of each ; )
If comes from the Latin noun “genus”, ie “kind or sort”, but also “descent, origin or birth”. The verb developed later.
So, basically you agree, Gabro?
It’s kinda like bipedal, it seems to me. Humans are bipeds, even though some people are born with poorly formed or absent legs/feet, ya know?