Bill Nye The Science Guy
Humans have about 80,000 genes in their DNA?
HomeHome About BillAbout Bill Nye MediaMedia Speaking EngagementsAppearances Nye StoreBill Nye Store For Kids & TeachersFor Kids & Teachers E-CardsE-Cards ContactContact Bill

Climate Change and Our National Interest

By Bill Nye | Published: February 12, 2010 – 11:30 am

Greetings scientists,

As I watched your comments about my recent television appearances, I was impressed by everyone’s passion. As a passionate guy myself, I appreciate it.

Here is my concern: a handful of apparently influential politically conservative figures in the media were drawing attention to the recent snows in Washington, D.C. A few asserted that the storm was evidence that human-made climate change is a myth.

Not only is that claim not reasonable, to my ear, the claim that they really don’t know better is not reasonable. To be sure, it is possible that some of these people really did or do believe that a snowstorm in February proves something about climate. But, much more reasonable to me is that they are doing their best to mislead their audiences.

Since the stakes are so very high for every human that will live into this century, I encourage those people to cut it out. We need to solve big problems as quickly as possible. We need new, reliable, well-distributed sources of energy. We need a means to produce and provide clean water for billions of people. Ideally, these challenges will be met all or in part with technologies developed in the United States, technologies that we can export. Efforts to thwart our society’s understanding of science are not in our national interest.

Stay passionate my friends, let’s work together and change the world.

Bill Nye

47 Responses to “Climate Change and Our National Interest”

  1. James says:

    Great post.

  2. Darren says:

    Im so disapointed in you bill, please review the “Science” and you will see the carbon theory has many holes in it. It is great to conserve and tread lightly on mother earth, but is not OK to dupe people with a political agenda as a means to acheve this result. It will turn people away as they see this theory fall apart. As a postmaster like you once were I have always enjoyed your success and entertainment, lets keep it real bill.

  3. I see your formal background is a BS in mechanical engineering . I would hope that would be enough to understand the basic Stefan-Boltzmann and Kirchhoff laws which relate our spectrum to equilibrium temperature . Thus , I would hope you could follow generally their implementation on my website which shows that we are a total of about 8c warmer than a gray body in our orbit . I’d also point you to Richard Lindzen’s graph on my site , http://cosy.com/Science/Lindzenlineplot800.gif which shows how insignificant the total change in our mean temperature has been over the last century compared to normal daily variation — and , of course only half of that has been since we have been restoring a bit of the gas upon which all life is built to the atmosphere from the lush epochs in which it was “sequestered” .

    Please quantitatively elaborate the physics that makes you so fear the minor change in our spectrum from a little more of this source of life rather than welcome its profound enhancement of plant growth , eg , http://cosy.com/Science/CO2-pineGrowth100120half.jpg .

  4. C Jack Bradford says:

    Bill:

    Anyone who conflates weather (blizzards, cold spells, etc) with climate is making an amateur\’s mistake. But you are equally wrong in associating climate skepticism with conservatism or any other political stance.

    As Feynman said: The first principle of science is that you must not fool yourself–and you are the easiest person to fool. And mixing your political emotions with your science is the height of scientific foolishness.

    There are two key scientific papers that everyone should read in order to have a balanced view of climate science: The first is a study of the extremely high error levels in scientific software: http://www.leshatton.org/Documents/Texp_ICSE297.pdf — although it was written in 1997 it still fully applies to current climate models, as is clearly shown in the famous \’Harry ReadMe\’ file, for example.

    Everyone knows about the IPCC\’s Assessment Reports and everyone should know that these reports argue strongly in favor of Anthropogenic Climate Change — but it is essential to be familiar with the purely scientific arguments on the skeptic\’s side. This paper http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/surface_temp.pdf is the best I have found so far.

    The one thing a Science Guy must never say is that science is ever \"settled\" — in the case of Global Climate Change we must never say \"spend billions on CO2 reduction since doing so might avert disaster\". What we must ask instead is: If we spend billions on CO2 reduction, what other environmental projects — overfishing, deforestation, etc are we short-changing?

  5. Tomas says:

    So Bill, I’m unpatriotic because I don’t believe what you believe?! If the earth is breaking one hundred year records for cold and snow. That means the earth had similar weather 100 years ago. Global Warming? We know from historical records, in the 1770′s General Washington’s troops suffered through brutal winters. Global Warming? What about three, four or five hundred years of our weather history. Oh look Bill, I’m back to 1400 and the mini ice age. How did that happen? What caused that Bill? How did the earth warm from the mini ice age Bill? Tell me Bill, is Al Gore’s movie the truth or a lie? Science or sceince fiction? UK scientist in a UK court found it to be a fraud. Shall I tell you what the court ordereed or do you already know. It seems to have been surpressed from the American people. I wonder what’s going to happen when the American people finally learn the truth. You and your comrades should be preparing for for the coming tsunami of lawsuits. Because they are coming!!!

  6. Patriot says:

    Bill,

    I used to respect what you do in terms of making science fun for kids. It’s sad to see you’re just one of the mindless drones marching in lockstep with the liberal agenda. This scam isn’t about science, it’s about control & freedom of choice. Many patriots have given their lives defending our right to self governance, free speech & free thought. It’s Marxists like you that seek to impose their “correct thinking” for the good of the party and its dear leader. Don’t think global warming is real? Then you must be anti-science right? No, anti JUNK science… It’s pathetic and entertaining watching you clowns point to everything no matter how absurd and say “see.. it’s global warming!!” The jig is up,the lie has been exposed.

    Also, what would possess you to go on that leftist kooks TV show? You must enjoy or believe their leftist hatred for everything this country stands for. Maybe you should go to work for the U.N., they feel the same way.

  7. Ken says:

    The Royal Society’s motto used to be “On the word of no one.”

    That motto came from the idea that skepticism is the highest virtue in science. To be skeptical means to be open to ideas, but not necessarily swayed by them unless given sufficient evidence.

    To call a skeptic of a prevailing theory “unpatriotic”, or to attack them on some other personal level, is not what a fair scientist would do. A fair scientist would stay in the realm of ideas and observation. Personal or carte blanche attacks against skeptics, labeling them as “deniers” analogous to “Holocaust deniers”, is advocacy, not science.

    I have always admired you, that is until these recent attacks you made against skeptical scientists. You have taken a rather large step back in my book.

  8. Mike says:

    Bill,
    How can you claim to be a “scientist” and yet are so close minded? I bet you believe Pluto is still a planet. Scientists need to be open to the idea that the theories they hold can be wrong and must be modified with more information.
    For you to call anyone that dares doubt “unpatriotic” smacks of oppression that science has seen from other groups.
    Your clear political agenda has now definitely shown through. I am sure you fully support the recent data manipulation and the trashing of the raw data so no one can objectively continue to find true causes.
    Why don’t you observe true science and keep your beliefs out of it and examine the real data instead of spreading paranoid fantasies.

  9. Dan says:

    Bill, perhaps you can answer two questions I\’ve address to many others. Most don\’t even bother to reply. Is that characteristic of all liberals?

    Climate change is a fact of history, and the present is a part of history. Still, what is the proof that man\’s activities are the cause of the current change? Remember that an association is not cause and effect. Second, regardless of its cause, what is the proof than man can do anything to alter this change?

    These are legitimate and important questions that should be answered before governments spend more trillions that will do as much good as trillions already spent.

  10. Dan says:

    Bill, perhaps you can answer two questions I\\\\\\\’ve address to many others. Most don\\\\\\\’t even bother to reply. Is that characteristic of all liberals?

    Climate change is a fact of history, and the present is a part of history. Still, what is the proof that man\\\\\\\’s activities are the cause of the current change? Remember that an association is not cause and effect. Second, regardless of its cause, what is the proof than man can do anything to alter this change?

    These are legitimate and important questions that should be answered before governments spend more trillions that will do as much good as trillions already spent.

  11. mike says:

    Bill, I use to admire you for your science programming. My kids and I learned a lot from you. But you have really hurt your credibility. Questioning patriotism because others don’t believe what you believe??? Not recognizing the recent discovery of the fraud by the main source of global climate hysteria. And finally, not knowing that the Noble Prize you say this group got for the discovery of Global Climate Change was a “PEACE” prize with no scientific basis for the prize. There was not a single scientist on the panel that made this award.
    You need to check your facts and understand the details before you make such statements. Check the real science. By the way, BTUs melt ice, not degrees F or C. Anyone using an elevated dry-bulb temperature only as a basis for claims on global warming is someone who obviously doesn’t understand heat content of air. Are you aware that 84 degrees at 56% RH has more heat in the air than 97 degrees at 26% RH. Temperature alone DOES NOT tell the whole story.
    You have really disappointed a lot of people out here.

  12. Roman says:

    I think the political influence goes both ways. The problem is the deceitful use of the term Climate Change as it can mean anything because changes are always occurring. It is tantamount to stacking the deck the way it is being used to push a particular political agenda. I thought you would be above that.

  13. Irona says:

    I guess you have forgotten the old liberal mantra “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” or has that been found null and void now that your party is in power? Changing the rules, tsk-tsk-tsk…

    OK, Mr.”Science Guy”, tell this unpatriotic global warming, err, climate change skeptic just exactly what is the proper temperature of the earth supposed to be? How do you know for sure? What evidence do you have? What if you are wrong? What are you PERSONALLY doing to stop climate change? Maybe you should give up breathing since all you do is emit CO2; that would certainly help Gaia now wouldn’t it?

    Call us skeptics unpatriotic all you want, it doesn’t make it true and it just proves that you liberals are close-minded, name-calling sheep. You have earned yourself a permanent place on my “used to be good, now insane” list.

  14. Jim Spinoso says:

    How can you be so foolish – unpatriotic? Why don’t you present the data from NOAA you referenced? If someone\\\’s conclusions differ from yours like – Dr Roy Spencer’s. Then your only response is naming calling.

    That not science that is your ego and your agenda.

  15. Wade Davis says:

    Wow Bill you made all these people so mad, you must be on the right track. What I would like to know is at what point do all of these people think that we should step in and intervene , after the earths temp. has gone up an average of ten degree’s a year ? Twenty ? There seems to be a clear trend of increased heat and sea level rise, do we wait for cities to flood and rare habitat to be destroyed before we act ? If someone sees what they think is a trend that could have such severe and drastic effects on every corner of the planet and impact many of the species that we have pushed to the brink of extinction. Then isn’t it their moral and ethical duty to make their voice herd and try to avoid the danger ?

    It is unpatriotic to ignore facts and debate for pure political reasons he was right to call them out on it. Whats he supposed to do get intimidated by those bullies at fox news like most people are, all they do is try to scare people.

    Your doing great Bill. Keep up the good fight.

  16. Al says:

    Bill you never sounded more stupid in your entire career. First of all the Nobel prize has pretty much proven itself to be a joke lately. Al Gore and President Obama winning it for example just proves how worthless the prize has become. A lot of the “peer reviewed” material has proven to be nothing more than puff pieces in magazines like Climbers World. The head of the IPCC isn’t even a scientist. His job prior to the IPCC was building railroads. He has no idea what any of the actual science is. When you look at the un doctored data it shows that we are merely in the middle of a natural cycle, not some massive global warming. In the ’70s they were talking about a possible ice age when that didn’t pan out they started talking about global warming. when people called them on that then they decided to change the name to climate change. No matter how you look at it it is nothing more than a shell game in order to relieve advanced countries from their money in order to give it to third world countries. Also bill it is not unpatriotic to disagree with someones ignorant assed theory that clearly does not fit with reality.

    I’m also not pleased with the way you are spouting Al and Baracks nonsense about how the youth of America are smarter than their parents simply because they are more easily duped into believing this utterly stupid nonsense that is climate change. You have basically proven that you are not to be taken seriously as a scientist any more than climate change is to be taken seriously.

  17. Fred Reeve says:

    I would like to ask Mr. Nye what is so unpatriotic about disbelief? I have seen scientific papers that prove the worlds temp has only fluctuated +/- 2 degrees C. over the last 2 millenia. You people won’t hold a debate, your
    debate is screaming at the top of your lungs:”We’re right and everyone else
    is wrong”. The one paper that showed how avg. earth temps have only fluctuated +/- 2 deg. C was presented to symposium of scientists in Australia but did we hear anything about it. Are you kidding, I’m sick and tired of hearing about global warming and humans are causing it. MALE BOVINE EXCREMENT!! We just went through a decade or more of unprecedented solar activity,ie sunspots and over abundance of x-ray activity, no wonder earth temps. soared. How are you going to dial down the solar output?? HMMM? C’mon scientists can’t even get a baseline on how much co2 is in the atmosphere day by day. So hold your breath.

  18. Al says:

    To Wade Davis
    Look climate change is nothing more than natural cycles. Think about it how many different ice ages has this planet gone through? How many times has the Earth thawed out from those ice ages? What was the cause of those ice ages, dinosaur farts? The fact is that the real data shows that temperatures start to spike and then CO2 increases not the other way around. When it comes to real science you change theories in order to fit data. The IPCC and the eco mobsters choose instead to change data in order to prove their theories. Bill is no where near the right track he is simply a patsy for a group that is starting to go done in flames as the truth comes out. Of course if you listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman you’ll never know these things because they are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the current socialist regime in the white house.

  19. Trenten Meyer says:

    I used to respect you Bill. Because of you, I want to go into science. But unfortunately, you are wrong. You are wrong on many levels. I’ll start with the easiest. Unpatriotic? Since when has science had to do with patriotism? Many of history’s most brilliant scientist were what some would call patriotic. Science has nothing to do with patriotism. Science has to do with finding what the truth is regardless of what others think. Second of, the hottest year on record was years ago, the temperature is going down. Twenty years ago, they said we were over due for an ice age. These two facts, coupled with the fact that the weather is getting progressively worse in the opposite direction suggests that that our Climate is Changing into one that is similar to an ice age. Third off, our ability to predict weather and thus by extension, long term climate breaks down after a couple of days, a week and a half at most. Your talking about hundreds of years here. We just don’t have the ability to predict it. Also, to think that human beings can effect the planet to that extent is ludicrous, Mount Saint Helen’s has put out more greenhouse gases than humans through all of human history. Don’t think I’m against everything green. I think we should invest in green technology simply because it will be better for US in the long run. I like the planet, I don’t need people to tell me that I need to treat it better. Eco nuts are twisting data to fit theories. if any scientist speaks out against climate change, they are ridiculed and they are hardly ever taken seriously again. When you are the authority, it is even more important to reject it. Everything has fads, science included. through out scientific history, we have believed things that were just plain wrong. While what you said about younger generations grasping scientific leaps was true, it only works when what they believe is the truth. Our society is, unfortunately a society predominantly free of thought. In a world where the easy way is the way most taken, it leaves our minds open to the thoughts of others only to create a world where everyone agrees and no one is truly free. But that is a subject for one of my future papers. Considering the state of current science, i’m going into mathematics.

    -Trenten Meyer
    Age 16

  20. Jim says:

    Bill,

    Your article is extremely biased. First, you had to make it political by blasting conservatives. Second, the first articles I read were by individuals who were using the snow storm to justify man made global warming, not refute it. Yet you only took the view that it was a few conservatives in the media that were using the snow storm to refute global warming. I too am a scientist. I am a computer scientist and have a passion for other science as well. Just because people disagree with your point of view you should not label them as unpatriotic. I know that all science should be openly debated. It should be the search for truth. Yet in your article you made no mention of the misrepresentation of the climate data by the UEA/CRU and the errors in the IPCC report. I can accept the possibility that the IPCC errors were honest mistakes. But what the scientists at the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit did was criminal. I don’t believe in assigning labels to people but if you’re going to do it you should start with them.

    Jim

  21. Wayne says:

    Mr Bill,

    Please keep you opinions to yourself. Stick to educating the children and keep the crackpot comments out of it. The things that you have said on Global Warming is like getting sex advise from Mr Wizard.

  22. David Beall says:

    Bill:

    It isn’t just about the snow in DC. However, the recent winter storms prove that weather is cyclical, just like climate, which is essentially the weather patterns over an extended period. There is no “right” temperature or “right” climate. But let’s get to the meat of the matter.
    The warmers have been caught practicing bad science or just outright lying too many times to be taken seriously. Let’s begin with the hockey stick graph, which was said to have shown a sudden spike in average global temperatures beginning in 1900. The trouble with that was that the algorythm used by Michael Mann to produce the graph was designed to produce hockey sticks and show a sudden temperature spike.
    Then we have Climategate. You can be angry that someone may have hacked the email accounts of East Anglia University climate researchers, or you can be angry that the “researchers” tried to manipulate data and corrupt the peer-review process. I choose the latter.
    Then of course the folks behind the Copenhagen Conference knew going in that they were reporting incorrect data about receding glaciers and chose to ignore it. Basing a report on one person’s opinion isn’t science. Shall we continue? How about the shenanigans with temperature reporting; and a reliance on low altitude stations with higher average temperatures and much fewer higher altitude temperatures, as well as evidence that some stations photographed were located next to heat sources such as an air conditioner exhaust vent? How about measuring temperatures from hundreds of miles away?
    We can go on to discuss the fact that climate change theory relies heavily on worst-case scenario computer models in which the data input is easily manipulated by “scientists” who rely on global warming alarmism to secure lucrative government grants.
    We can discuss the fact that Al Gore screams about an “endangered” polar bear population that has been INCREASING; or the fact that a judge in the UK found many serious errors in his film “An Inconvenient Truth,” which has to be the most ironic title in history. We have scientists, who are supposed to always look for more information screaming at the top of their lungs that “the science is settled.” No real scientist would ever make this statement.
    I think you get the point. The warmers have been guilty of too many dishonest acts in the name of “global warming” to ever be believed. You folks think the rest of us are too stupid to understand a graph or to understand how the scientific process works. You just want us to believe that the sky is falling because you SAY SO.
    Well take note. I don’t believe it, and I am not alone. Also, I will never be able to use your educational products to teach my students, because if you aren’t able to understand the scientific process, and view science as a political tool, then your materials have no place in my classroom, Bill Nye the Want-To-Be Science Guy.

  23. Delta Hedging says:

    Wow, what an unbelievable collection of nutjobs.
    I wonder how many people got hung up on your “patriotic” comment.
    I wonder if they realize that their desire to turn this into a political debate is ultimately going to ruin not only the country, but the entire planet.

    It IS unpatriotic to believe that the earth is going to rectify itself. I imagine that these are the same people that imagine that prolonged exposure to carcinogens has no affect on the human body. It should not be hard to realize that the way we are treating this planet is going to have dire repercussions for us all. We need to put aside petty partisan bickering, and put the best interests of our planet at the forefront. Anything else, is UNPATRIOTIC not just to our country, but to our entire planet! How one can feel that a desire to protect our only home is motivated by politics or a political party is beyond me.

    I also wonder why people feel the need to justify why they refuse to save our planet by assigning a political partisan side to wanting to protect our planet. THE EARTH DOES NOT CARE WHAT PARTY YOU BELONG TO. By allowing yourself to be swayed by anyone into believing that a political agenda exists is silly and makes you look beyond foolish.

    Finally, i wanted to give a shout-out to Bob Armstrong. Sir, your website is one of the craziest things i have ever seen, ever. How you feel competent in arguing the science behind the facts is beyond me.

  24. Delta Hedging says:

    Additionally, MR. Wizard is more competent in giving sex advice then any lay person. Human sexuality is a scientific process, and not political or religious. Sure, we can debate the soul or when creation happens…but the act of reproduction is strictly scientific.

    People who would rather listen to a politician or clergy member for advice on sexual reproduction are more then likely the same individuals who feel that abstinence-only sex education is beneficial.

    I can only hope that these misguided individuals can realize the folly of their ways before it is too late, but i fear that this will never occur; people feel the need to allow partisan bickering to cloud the real issue, the systematic destruction of our only ecosystem.

  25. George Taylor says:

    William Nye:

    Your blatantly biased article reflects yet another example of the cacophonous Goebbelsian rhetoric regurgitated by a typical brainwashed American “celebrity” lemming.

    You, sir, have no scientific qualification at all to provide an informed opinion to anyone with regard to Earth’s climate, as you are only a Mechanical Engineer, holding a Bachelor of Science undergrad degree. Honestly, referring to yourself as a “scientist” strains credulity. By definition, a mechanical engineer builds things; ergo, you are little more than a glorified carpenter, ironworker, or mason. Further, during the past few decades, you have made your living as an entertainer – an overpaid court jester.

    I concede that your original field of study and past work at Boeing does require intelligence, but not genius – your common BS undergrad degree is far from a Master’s or a Ph.D., specifically in climate related fields; e.g., Chemistry, Physics, or Meteorology.

    Go ahead Bill, condemn this terse missive as a personal attack, but also show everyone here one example of my charges being inaccurate.

  26. Tom says:

    “OSLO (Reuters) – The U.N. panel of climate experts overstated how much of the Netherlands is below sea level, according to a preliminary report on Saturday, admitting yet another flaw after a row last month over Himalayan glacier melt.” It looks like the evidence continues to grow of this hoax, fraud, theft by deception and harm and indoctrination of children.

  27. Rick554 says:

    Geez Bill, My sons used to watch you all the time. From you they learned a lot about science, which led them into the construction business and the Military. The best part of your show was the “Bill…B-b-b-bBill “
    Stick to kiddy shows and Rachel Maddow , both of which are basically for 6 year olds.
    PS: I thought dissent was the highest form of patriotism……??

  28. Johnny says:

    Hey Bill,

    Found a few “unpatriotic” scientists for ya

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7026317.ece

    Your liberal slip is showing.

  29. Teresa in Fort Worth, TX says:

    Dear Mr. Nye,
    I, too, studied Engineering in College. I had the great good fortune to be taught biology and chemistry by two extremely good teachers while in high school. One thing that I was taught in Biology is that the Earth is constantly changing. Another thing that I was taught is that whenever a theory is proposed in the scientific community, it must be “tested” by attempting to prove it wrong.

    The most important thing that we had to do when running labs in chemistry class was to have a notebook that had carbon paper in it, and we had to turn in one set of data, while keeping a copy of the data in our notebook. The reason for this was so that we could verify that our data wasn’t changed, as well as to allow anyone who wished to duplicate our results would know what data we had gathered. If we didn’t have the original data available, then our results were considered null and void. We were told that this is STANDARD PRACTICE across the scientific field.

    The scientists who are currently the “experts” in the field made their claims using data that they were not willing to share with other scientists – only hand-picked scientists were allowed access to their data; scientists who were already part of the inner circle. When they were finally required to release the data that they had used to reach their conclusions, they couldn’t produce the original data; they claimed that it had been destroyed.

    If I tried to pull that trick in Mrs. Berry’s Introductory Chemistry class at the age of 15, I would have received a failing grade – and I was just a STUDENT. These men and women were MULTI-DEGREED PROFESSIONALS!!!!! What they did was wrong. Whether or not they have perpetrated fraud is for someone else to decide. At the very least, they should be required to go back to the beginning and start this process all over again. For any government to base decisions on what is at best flawed science – and at worst fraudulent science – is grossly misguided.

    To teach uncorroborated science to schoolchildren is criminal. What these scientists have done is unconscionable – they should be held to the highest possible standards. Science used to be an honorable field which was well-respected. These people have stained the reputations of ALL scientists through their actions. People will never be able to believe what a scientist says is so because of the actions of these few people who cared more about monetary gain than the standards of scientific endeavor.

  30. I am thoroughly unimpressed by a “science guy” that doesn’t know the difference between the exclusively political Nobel Peace Prize and the strictly scientific Nobel prizes. Or perhaps you think that the public is too stupid to know the difference and you just lied to us. Are you stupid or are you a liar?

    Take your manmade global warming religion and shove it.

  31. StewartM says:

    Bill, If the science behind this climate change theoryy is so solid why are climate scientists fabricating data and destroying eveidence that does not fit thir hypotheses? Do you consider me to be unpatriotic because I disagree with you on global warming? Your ad hominem attacks against people who are skeptical of “climate change” do not help your argument. Stcik to the scientific data and use it to make or break your theories. That is what the scientific method is all about.

  32. [...] Check the comments at the Science Guy’s website… Sphere: Related Content Share on: Facebook | digg_url = [...]

  33. Al says:

    Delta,
    We are not nutjobs. It is not unpatriotic to disagree with an unproven theory and quite frankly most of us only want the true nutjobs(the eco-nazis) to legitimately debate the science. The fact is, they cannot do that because they have falsified data in order to prove their theories. The planet does more harm to itself than we do. The number one source of oil spills in the oceans comes from vents in the seabeds. An erupting volcano puts out more greenhouse gases and pollution than the entire human race in a years time. Spikes in solar activity cause more warming than anything else we do. How about the fact that we have been in a cooling trend over the past 12 years? The eco-nazis were telling everybody in the ’70s that we were heading for an ice age, now it’s global warming, when things don’t work out their way they simply change the name because people are too stupid to notice. The eco-nazis have turned this into a political issue, we skeptics simply want true proof of what they are saying. when they can produce un-doctored facts and are willing to debate instead of insisting the science is settled then we can move forward.

  34. red pill says:

    Mr Nye:
    My doctorate and post doc degrees trump your bs (and I do mean bs). You are wrong. Go back to performing your simple tv tricks and leave science and interpretation of it to those that understand that it leads where it does, not where you want it to go…

  35. red pill says:

    Mr Nye:
    Why is patriotism defined by you as placing control of all the people of the world into the hands of an unelected few that seek clearly to personally profit by redefining and extracting value from individual lives for the purposes of the ruling class who seek to invent a new form of currency that only they control and profit from? Any of the environmental mavens discarding their mansions and suites for a 1 br cold water walkup flat? Their limos and jets and world junkets for a bicycle and sustainable organic garden in their back yard that they manage with their own hands??
    I wonder what the science of that is?

  36. mikerobinsonpc says:

    Mr. Nye, if you are a “science guy” this doesnt’d mean you are an atheiest. After all, many of the chief scientists of the past believed in God, they believed in the holy trinity of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Why is it that you and the other atheists want to to push for a non-God approach and want to seek science as a new arm of Satan? Come on. Get with it. See that Christ is the answer. No matter of “science as atheism” will save you or your adherents.

  37. Richard Blakely says:

    Hi Bill,
    It is a fact that CO2 already absorbs as much infrared as is possible. Goggle the report “The Lynching of Carbon Dioxide-the Innocent Source of Life”, written by Dr. Hertzberg. He is an expert on the CO2 topic. He is “more of an expert” on the topic than most “climatologists”.

  38. HMcKinney says:

    It is amazing and mindnumbing to see so many people get hung-up over your post. Though, that is society for you. It is true that the Earth goes through climatic change, but that takes thousands of years to achieve this. The current warming of the Earth’s atmosphere is cuased by access CO2; we humans are the one’s to blame for this. Simply put: too much CO2 in the air is warming our atmosphere via trapping the Sun’s radiation. This radiation will cause our polar ice caps to melt over time. This increase in fresh water will cause the ocean’s level to rise. There will also be an increase in moisture in the air, which in turn, will cause stronger storms such as Hurricanes and Blizzards.

    Global Warming ( or Climate Change ) is a very real and dangerous threat that is going to change the very existance of the way we live. I shutter to think what will the 22nd Century would be if we somehow don’t take the steps to curb the tide of the rising levels of CO2.

    One would only have to look at pictures of Glacier National Park, or the icebergs that are forming off the coast of Greenland at a dramatic rate. Even in Antarctica, the coldest place on Earth, the ice shelfs and caps are melting. In places like Alaska, the permafrost is melting, too. Think about it, the PERMAfrost is MELTING!

    Several islands in the South Pacific are in danger of disappearing all together. The islands of Tavalu are only 4.5 meters above sea level. If the levels of the Pacific continue to rise, this will not only sink the islands, but destroy crops such as the Coconut tree.

    Let’s not forget the hundreds of millions of other people that live in low lying areas around the world; places such as South Asia, the Low Counties of Europe, and coastal areas of the US, just to name a few. Where would these people go if the sea rises just an additional 10 feet? How would the world respond to a crisis in which millions are displaced and is facing starvation. How would the World’s economy be effected by this?

    The time is now. The World’s governments need to come with a plan to stop this tragedy from happening, before it is too late.

    Bill, it takes a man of great courage to do what you’re doing. Not too many people are willing to stick their neck’s out on the line and tell the truth like it is. I’ve always been a fan of you’re since I was a young child, but now, I respect you even more! Thanks for all the good work you’re doing!

    Hannibal J. McKinney.

  39. Terry Wolfe says:

    I see patriotism as a an obligation for living in the best country on the planet. This requires me to question political efforts to damage our freedoms and independence. To allow questionable claims cost us $Billions of wealth transfer to unproductive 3rd world countries makes no sense. A strong US economy will do more to power international growth than sapping the strength of America.
    The “science” even fails the laugh test. Imaging a sports stadium with 35,000 people in it cheering for their team. In the crowd are 10 people sprinkled through the crowd for the other side. That is the CO2 level from 150 years ago. Today the count has increased to 13. Can we agree that this would seem to be an almost insignificant change. So Bill let me ask, Really?

  40. Tomas says:

    Oh Bill, it looks like your all going to need good lawyers. Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html#ixzz0fZMy5My5

  41. Tomas says:

    Hannibal, Read my above post. By the way, consider the amount of silt that pours into the oceans every year, it is in the 600,000 metric tons range. It is THE major cause of rising sea levels.

  42. @ Delta , February 13, 2010 at 11:22 pm : Thanks for the “shout out” . May get a few others to peruse http://CoSy.com .

    I guess I feel as competent as you to argue these issues because I grew up religiously watching Don Herbert which likely contributed to my getting an 800 on my physics college board . You likely noticed my logo which is the projection of a 6 dimensional cube rotated to make all the vertices visible . The hard part was figuring out how to draw it , or any dimensional cube with a minimal continuous line . I did that about 30 years ago in APL to show the potential of computer aided intelligence . That’s what allows me to state we’re about 8c warmer than a gray body in our orbit and be far from whelmed by the quality of the quantitative physical understanding of planetary temperature I see on either side in this existentially consequential debate .

    BTW , I think you ought to consider more closely the , to me , astoundingly enhanced growth with more CO2 of the pine trees in the graphic , for which I wish I had better attribution , which I linked . Consider the grade school fact that every bite of food in every corner of the planet is ultimately more than 90% CO2 combined with H2O by sunlight , and therefore so are you . One ought to be skeptical in the extreme when told the substance out of which they are made is going to kill the very life it allows to exist .

  43. Gil says:

    Bill,
    How can you call us unpatriotic? Bill, you are not a scientist, you are only an entertainer. I didn’t know that you would let your liberal views cloud your intelligence, please try to understand the facts before you make a fool of yourself again.

  44. GeologistBill says:

    I saw your interview on CNN and was disappointed, you basically talked about weather with regard to the recent snowstorms and cold winter. Are you not aware that from the Climategate scandal that Jones at the CRU has admitted flawed data? The global warming hoax is coming to an end. The UK media gets it, and do the people of the United States get it – just check out CNNs’ ratings. We have more pressing needs as a society than wasting trillions of dollars on needless carbon mitigation schemes.

  45. Bill,

    Take a look at a recent Blog I wrote (http://theendisfar.wordpress.com/2010/02/14/q-are-1000s-of-climate-scientists-wrong/) regarding this very issue. Convection and Latent Heat of Vaporization are so efficient at cooling the planet, “trapping” 2 Watts per square meter at the surface cannot be measured as temperature.

    For example, a cubic meter of water at 14 C (average Sea Surface Temp) contains ~1.2 Billion Joules. It takes ~4 Million joules to raise the Temp 1 C. The 2 Watts that CO2 “traps” only make up for about 1/2,000,000 of what it takes to raise the temp 1 C.

    As for being “unpatriotic” for being a skeptic, I suppose all who use the Scientific Method are unpatriotic.

    Very disappointed, you have been a true scientist up to this point.

  46. Jeff in NoVA says:

    I’d rather be unpatriotic than a tool for a movement built on bad science and the censoring of rivals.

    Admit it, the emperor has no clothes. The “movement” is dead. You can blog about shouting “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, but it is over.

  47. Chris says:

    Bill, you have lost all credibility. I don’t remember you attacking Al Gore for using Hurricane Katrina as proof of Global Warming.

    It is sad that all Liberals have to be dishonest all the time.

    Also, attacking someones patriotism because they disagree with you is outrageous. Liberals like your self always accuse conservatives of attacking your patriotism, yet the evidence shows its Liberals who attack.

    What an idiot you are. Pure liberal idiot.

    You have been proven wrong, yet you will never admitt it. You are nothing but a political hack!!!!

Filed under: Consider the Following

Follow TheScienceGuy on Twitter Follow Bill on Facebook Bill Nye the Science Guy: Offical You Tube Page
Epsiode Guide