Watch Tucker Carlson Lose It After Bill Nye Takes Him To School On Climate Change

[westwall]

It has been very amusing to watch the antics of the denier cultists on this one.

A popular science explainer, Bill Nye, appeared on the FauxNews show with Tucker Carlson, a rightwing corporate stooge, and tried to discuss global warming and its consequent climate changes. Carlson played to his denier cult audience by posing fairly meaningless questions based on a misunderstanding or denial of the scientific facts. Bill Nye patiently and repeatedly tried to give some kind of rational response to the fairly idiotic questions Carlson kept rephrasing but Carlson interrupted and cut him off about 30 times without any sign whatsoever that he was even trying to understand Nye's responses, that were based on actual climate science.

So, the corporate puppet-masters of the denier cult decided to go full-on alternative reality and immdiatedly put out very fraudulent and deceptive articles crowing about how Nye supposedly couldn't answer Carlson's questions. And the denier cult sheep were clueless enough to believe them!

All this is obvious when you actually watch the exchange. Nye made Carlson look like an idiot frantically trying to deflect the truth. Carlson' closing remark,"that sounded ominous", about Nye's comment, in effect, that they would be seeing each other again on this topic, sounded bizarrely paranoid and unhinged.

Watch Tucker Carlson Lose It After Bill Nye Takes Him To School On Climate Change
UPROXX
STACEY RITZEN
2/28/17


Following his Facebook Live chat with Bernie Sanders yesterday, during which he made some pretty depressing predictions regarding the continued effects of climate change, Bill Nye was invited onto Fox News to discuss the subject with Tucker Carlson. Unfortunately, this conversation was not nearly as productive — or civil, for that matter — as his one with the Senator was.

Carlson came right out of the gate swinging, condescendingly panning the Science Guy’s claims that climate change skeptics suffer from the psychological delusion of cognitive dissonance. When Nye was given a chance to speak, he calmly explained that cognitive dissidence isn’t a delusion, but simple human nature in that humans have a tendency to eschew scientific evidence that disagrees with their worldview.

Firing back, Carlson claimed that we all should be skeptical and “asking ourselves questions” when it comes to uh, scientific evidence, but Nye was not having this argument. “Climate change denial is denial”, he explained. “The evidence is overwhelming.” Carlson followed up and asked point blank why there’s a change in the climate, and if it’s part of an endless cycle or if human activity is the cause of it.

“It’s not a subtle question, human activity is causing climate change, to a degree that it’s a very serious problem in the next few decades,” Nye responded. After some back and forth in which Nye was constantly interrupted and given rephrased questions in an attempt to throw him off, Tucker demanded to know why we shouldn’t be “encouraging people to ask honest questions.” To that, Nye shot back, “Let me ask you this, why aren’t you concerned about it, don’t you have four children?”

It was more than apparent that Carlson did not invite his guest on to participate in a productive conversation, but attempt to discredit him — a point Nye later made by using his phone to time how long it would take Carlson to interrupt him. Although he probably fully anticipated it, as this sort of discourse is par for the course when it comes to the Fox News host.

I watched the whole sordid thing. Carlson did a fairly poor job and nye did his usual talk over the questioner and spew memes. Neither person "won".

 

[Crick]

Tucker Carlson: "Wait, wait, wait, wait...". THAT was talking over the other.

 

[westwall]

Tucker Carlson: "Wait, wait, wait, wait...". THAT was talking over the other.

Carlson asked a question. nye refused to answer and instead spewed memes. Carlson was trying to get him to answer the question. The problem is the question that carlson asked was inane.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tucker Carlson: "Wait, wait, wait, wait...". THAT was talking over the other.

Carlson asked a question. nye refused to answer and instead spewed memes. Carlson was trying to get him to answer the question. The problem is the question that carlson asked was inane.

The problem is the question that carlson asked was inane.

Bill Nye is inane, so the question was on target.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Nye and his "overwhelming evidence"

Of fraud.

 

[westwall]

Tucker Carlson: "Wait, wait, wait, wait...". THAT was talking over the other.

Carlson asked a question. nye refused to answer and instead spewed memes. Carlson was trying to get him to answer the question. The problem is the question that carlson asked was inane.

The problem is the question that carlson asked was inane.

Bill Nye is inane, so the question was on target.

I disagree. Carlson should have asked a more pointed question. That would have expose nye even more for the boob he is.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Nye came to talk about cognitive dissonance.

Carlson should have made sure he was clear that the challenge wasn't accepting Nye's basic premise.

That would have been a different show.

I like Carlson...but he has gotten sloppy.

 

[RollingThunder]

Nye made Carlson look like a blithering idiot.

 

[Boss]

Nye made Carlson look like a blithering idiot.

 

[Olde Europe]

Nye made Carlson look like a blithering idiot.

Nah, Carlson was more than up to this job on his own.

 

[Crick]

Tucker Carlson: "Wait, wait, wait, wait...". THAT was talking over the other.

I disagree. Carlson should have asked a more pointed question. That would have expose nye even more for the boob he is.

Spouting "Wait, wait, wait, wait" while Nye was speaking, which Carlson did repeatedly, was an interruption of the other speaker.

 

[Olde Europe]

Yes, and I asked you in the other thread you abandoned, what happened to all that ice? You insulted me and made the claim that ice doesn't melt between ice ages. I find this interesting because, where are the 3-mile-thick ice sheets covering most of North America? I always assumed, whenever we move out of an ice age into an interglacial period, the ice melts. This would explain why we currently experience ice shelves melting.

Since this totally destroys your talking point, you hurl a few insults at me then go start a new thread to repeat your nonsense. You can run but you can't hide. What happened to all the ice from the last ice age?

You know, Boss, this thread is about Nye and Carlson, so just in short: The Earth has moved out of the last ice age more than 10,000 years ago. So, we're supposed to be in a stable inter-glacial period, with stable levels of ice volume, arguably heading into the next ice age several thousand years down the road. Your argument suffers from the same fault the denialings' arguments around "natural cycle" usually suffer: There is no detectable "natural" forcing that accounts for the current warming trend, and the loss of ice volume, retreating glaciers, etc. Hence, your argument is invalid, your nevertheless unshakable conviction is scurrilous, and your chest-pounding ridiculous.

 

[Boss]

You know, Boss, this thread is about Nye and Carlson, so just in short: The Earth has moved out of the last ice age more than 10,000 years ago. So, we're supposed to be in a stable inter-glacial period, with stable levels of ice volume, arguably heading into the next ice age several thousand years down the road. Your argument suffers from the same fault the denialings' arguments around "natural cycle" usually suffer: There is no detectable "natural" forcing that accounts for the current warming trend, and the loss of ice volume, retreating glaciers, etc. Hence, your argument is invalid, your nevertheless unshakable conviction is scurrilous, and your chest-pounding ridiculous.

We are in an interglacial period. The estimates are, we are about 1,800 years from the halfway point of a Milankovitch cycle. Our ice volumes are relatively stable, we lose and gain ice each year at the two poles. Overall, we have been running a slight deficit... we're losing a little more than we're gaining... BUT... until we are past the halfway point of the latest Milankovitch cycle and heading toward the next ice age, that is to be expected because ice has to melt. If it didn't melt, we'd be stuck in a perpetual ice world between ice ages.

The point is, the alarmist hand-wringing over melting ice shelves is silly. Of course ice is melting, we're not heading into a glaciation period yet. In 1,800 years from now, if ice is still melting and doing so regularly every year over many decades, then we might consider this to be a problem. But it's STILL not that big of a deal.

Did you know, the ice age prior to the last one was actually triggered because the planet was brimming with these large tree-like plants which were essentially sucking up all the CO2 and producing oxygen? Yesss.... turns out, not enough CO2 in the atmosphere prevents the greenhouse effect from properly warming the planet. So, during that Milankovitch cycle, with the planet's CO2 levels at extreme lows, it plunged us into an ice age. I bet a lot of people don't know about that.

 

[Vastator]

You know, Boss, this thread is about Nye and Carlson, so just in short: The Earth has moved out of the last ice age more than 10,000 years ago. So, we're supposed to be in a stable inter-glacial period, with stable levels of ice volume, arguably heading into the next ice age several thousand years down the road. Your argument suffers from the same fault the denialings' arguments around "natural cycle" usually suffer: There is no detectable "natural" forcing that accounts for the current warming trend, and the loss of ice volume, retreating glaciers, etc. Hence, your argument is invalid, your nevertheless unshakable conviction is scurrilous, and your chest-pounding ridiculous.

We are in an interglacial period. The estimates are, we are about 1,800 years from the halfway point of a Milankovitch cycle. Our ice volumes are relatively stable, we lose and gain ice each year at the two poles. Overall, we have been running a slight deficit... we're losing a little more than we're gaining... BUT... until we are past the halfway point of the latest Milankovitch cycle and heading toward the next ice age, that is to be expected because ice has to melt. If it didn't melt, we'd be stuck in a perpetual ice world between ice ages.

The point is, the alarmist hand-wringing over melting ice shelves is silly. Of course ice is melting, we're not heading into a glaciation period yet. In 1,800 years from now, if ice is still melting and doing so regularly every year over many decades, then we might consider this to be a problem. But it's STILL not that big of a deal.

Did you know, the ice age prior to the last one was actually triggered because the planet was brimming with these large tree-like plants which were essentially sucking up all the CO2 and producing oxygen? Yesss.... turns out, not enough CO2 in the atmosphere prevents the greenhouse effect from properly warming the planet. So, during that Milankovitch cycle, with the planet's CO2 levels at extreme lows, it plunged us into an ice age. I bet a lot of people don't know about that.

Precisely. All the climate alarmists arguments, are based on the unproven premise that the post ice age melt period had ended; for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

 

[edthecynic]

Everything Brent Bozo's MRC touches is fake. And I saw the video, Nye answered BowTucker's question repeatedly in spite of his rude talking over him.

Guess you missed the video. Newsbusters did not make a fake video.

"Nye could not give a specific answer to what Carlson asked for and only managed to answer “to a degree that it’s a very serious problem in the next few decades.”

"Carlson tried six different times to get Nye to be more specific about the relative impact of human activity on the climate. Seemingly frustrated, Nye claimed that humans are “100 percent” responsible for the change in climate that we may be witnessing.

"To Carlson’s last attempt at the question, Nye asserted that “the climate would be like it was in 1750” if not for human actions but offered no scientific evidence to back up his claim. He didn’t offer specifics on how he determined that exact date.

"Earlier that day, Nye sat down with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders for a “conversation about climate change” on Facebook Live. The former Democratic presidential candidate mentioned that he has colleagues who believe that the earth may be getting warmer but are skeptical of human’s exact involvement. He asked Nye to tell him “why they are wrong.”

"Just like with Carlson, Nye simply stated “Well, the science is settled everybody, sorry.” Feeling satisfied with this answer, he moved on to bashing Fox News for “crossing the line” by questioning climate change.

"Later in the interview, Sanders asked Nye the same question but again received the same rhetoric that Carlson got but Sanders did not press him on the issue. Nye just stated that “there’s overwhelming proof. Proof isn’t even the word. It’s overwhelming evidence.”

"Sanders didn’t press Nye for his idea of locking up climate critics. Carlson had questioned Nye for, in April of 2016, actually suggesting that climate critics could be prosecuted for their beliefs. Nye was disinterested in elaborating on his comments with Carlson.

"After Nye refused to give specific and substantial answers to his questions, Carlson argued that Nye was just playing politics. “You’re not a scientist. You’re a popularizer” Carlson said “So much of this you don’t know. You pretend that you know, but you don’t know, and you bully people who ask you questions.”

Latest Posts

Newsbusters = fake news.

 

[edthecynic]

[
Wrong again... Nye even faked his CO2 experiment with Al Gore.. He is nothing more than a halfwit fool..

Yeah sure. He has a degree in mechanical engineering from Cornell. You? And Frank?

The Limbaugh Institute.

 

[Billy_Bob]

LOL The moron thinks all warming since 1750 is man caused... Tell me again how you all stopped natural variation and the sun...

Since Bill Nye never said that, you only reveal, once again, the depths of your moronic incomprehension of pretty much everything, boober.

its in your own dam clip! cognitive dissonance much?

Nope! You fail miserably at comprehension, boober.

Nye was answering Carlson's question about what the current climate on Earth would be like if mankind had not added 45% more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, and he said that it would be much like the climate in England in 1750. That does NOT mean, as you idiotically misunderstood, that "all warming since 1750 is man caused".

You ignorant tard..

SO you believe like he does and that we should stop all fuel burning and progress, live in caves, not use medicines, not use power, or any other thing done by fossil fuels..

You really are an ignorant twat.. It means exactly what I said it did, only you would twist it some other way because it makes you look like a fool.. nice try at deflection.... FAIL

 

[Billy_Bob]

[
Wrong again... Nye even faked his CO2 experiment with Al Gore.. He is nothing more than a halfwit fool..

Yeah sure. He has a degree in mechanical engineering from Cornell. You? And Frank?

The Limbaugh Institute.

At least he has facts.. You idiots, not so much...

 

[depotoo]

wow, perceptions surely are different. He never answered the question, even one time answering by asking his own question. Unless, you believe his answer was correct that global climate change is 100% man made...

Everything Brent Bozo's MRC touches is fake. And I saw the video, Nye answered BowTucker's question repeatedly in spite of his rude talking over him.

Guess you missed the video. Newsbusters did not make a fake video.

"Nye could not give a specific answer to what Carlson asked for and only managed to answer “to a degree that it’s a very serious problem in the next few decades.”

"Carlson tried six different times to get Nye to be more specific about the relative impact of human activity on the climate. Seemingly frustrated, Nye claimed that humans are “100 percent” responsible for the change in climate that we may be witnessing.

"To Carlson’s last attempt at the question, Nye asserted that “the climate would be like it was in 1750” if not for human actions but offered no scientific evidence to back up his claim. He didn’t offer specifics on how he determined that exact date.

"Earlier that day, Nye sat down with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders for a “conversation about climate change” on Facebook Live. The former Democratic presidential candidate mentioned that he has colleagues who believe that the earth may be getting warmer but are skeptical of human’s exact involvement. He asked Nye to tell him “why they are wrong.”

"Just like with Carlson, Nye simply stated “Well, the science is settled everybody, sorry.” Feeling satisfied with this answer, he moved on to bashing Fox News for “crossing the line” by questioning climate change.

"Later in the interview, Sanders asked Nye the same question but again received the same rhetoric that Carlson got but Sanders did not press him on the issue. Nye just stated that “there’s overwhelming proof. Proof isn’t even the word. It’s overwhelming evidence.”

"Sanders didn’t press Nye for his idea of locking up climate critics. Carlson had questioned Nye for, in April of 2016, actually suggesting that climate critics could be prosecuted for their beliefs. Nye was disinterested in elaborating on his comments with Carlson.

"After Nye refused to give specific and substantial answers to his questions, Carlson argued that Nye was just playing politics. “You’re not a scientist. You’re a popularizer” Carlson said “So much of this you don’t know. You pretend that you know, but you don’t know, and you bully people who ask you questions.”

Latest Posts

Newsbusters = fake news.

 

[Olde Europe]

We are in an interglacial period. The estimates are, we are about 1,800 years from the halfway point of a Milankovitch cycle. Our ice volumes are relatively stable, we lose and gain ice each year at the two poles. Overall, we have been running a slight deficit... we're losing a little more than we're gaining...

Yeah, you're not listening. We're losing ice at an accelerating pace while...

"There is no detectable "natural" forcing [Milankovitch or otherwise] that accounts for the current warming trend, and the loss of ice volume, retreating glaciers, etc."​