Neil deGrasse Tyson Destroys Climate Deniers

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Billy Jingo
    I shave with Occam's Razor
    • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
    • 18663

    #1

    Neil deGrasse Tyson Destroys Climate Deniers

    Neil deGrasse Tyson Destroys Climate Deniers





    For 11 episodes now, the groundbreaking Fox and National Geographic Channel series Cosmos has been exploring the universe, outraging creationists, and giving science teachers across the nation something to show in class every Monday. In the process, the show has been drawing more than 3 million viewers every Sunday night, a respectable number for a science-focused show that is, after all, a major departure from what primetime audiences are used to.

    Cosmos certainly hasn't shied from controversy; it has taken on evolution and industry-funded science denial, and it has been devoting an increasing amount of attention to the subject of climate change. And apparently that was just the beginning. This coming Sunday, Cosmos will devote an entire episode to the topic. Here's the episode description from National Geographic:

    Our journey begins with a trip to another world and time, an idyllic beach during the last perfect day on the planet Venus, right before a runaway greenhouse effect wreaks havoc on the planet, boiling the oceans and turning the skies a sickening yellow. We then trace the surprisingly lengthy history of our awareness of global warming and alternative energy sources, taking the Ship of the Imagination to intervene at some critical points in time.

    Courtesy of National Geographic, above is a clip from the new episode, which should have climate deniers fulminating. In it, host Neil deGrasse Tyson uses the analogy of walking a dog on the beach to helpfully explain the difference between climate and weather (pay attention, Donald Trump) and to outline why, no matter how cold you were in January, that's no argument against global warming.

    We've seen the rest of the episode already, and won't spill the beans. But suffice it to say that it contains some powerful refutations of a number of other global warming denier talking points, as well as some ingenious sequences that explain the planetary-scale significance of climate change. It also contains some in situ reporting on the impacts of climate change, straight from the imperiled Arctic.
    “One day, when it's safe, when there's no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it's too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.”

    ~ Omar El Akkad
    ​
  • Billy Jingo
    I shave with Occam's Razor
    • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
    • 18663

    #2
    For my part, I am beginning to think it is too late. We should be in ameliorate stage, now. Or adaptation stage. The stop it stage sailed long ago.
    “One day, when it's safe, when there's no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it's too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.”

    ~ Omar El Akkad
    ​

    Comment

    • Bob Loblaw 3.0
      Morbidly obtuse
      • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
      • 353

      #3
      It's interesting watching the birth and early years of a new religion, with all the high-tech special effects available today.

      Comment

      • Billy Jingo
        I shave with Occam's Razor
        • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
        • 18663

        #4
        Originally posted by Bob Loblaw 3.0 View Post
        It's interesting watching the birth and early years of a new religion, with all the high-tech special effects available today.
        While I have faith that every time I take the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter it will equal pi, I am not sure I would call it a religion.
        “One day, when it's safe, when there's no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it's too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.”

        ~ Omar El Akkad
        ​

        Comment

        • Norm dePlume
          Err foil
          • Tuesday, October 22, 2013
          • 14904

          #5
          I didn't expect the dog walking metaphor. I though for sure he was gonna go for a waves vs. tides metaphor.
          Enjoy.

          Comment

          • Novaheart
            Guardian of civilization
            • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
            • 6070

            #6
            Originally posted by Billy Jingo View Post
            While I have faith that every time I take the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter it will equal pi, I am not sure I would call it a religion.
            The value of Pi hasn't changed in your lifetime. "Climate Change" has, on the other hand, switched from A Big Aass Freeze Be Comin To Get Ya to Lawd You ass Gonna Fry Or Drown.
            The year's at the spring
            And day's at the morn;
            Morning's at seven;
            The hill-side's dew-pearled;
            The lark's on the wing;
            The snail's on the thorn:
            God's in his heaven—
            All's right with the world!

            Comment

            • Billy Jingo
              I shave with Occam's Razor
              • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
              • 18663

              #7
              Originally posted by Novaheart View Post
              The value of Pi hasn't changed in your lifetime. "Climate Change" has, on the other hand, switched from A Big Aass Freeze Be Comin To Get Ya to Lawd You ass Gonna Fry Or Drown.
              That's nice.

              Has nothing to do with my metaphor but still, it was nice.
              “One day, when it's safe, when there's no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it's too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.”

              ~ Omar El Akkad
              ​

              Comment

              • scott
                Go-to Guru
                • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                • 15799

                #8
                Originally posted by Billy Jingo View Post
                While I have faith that every time I take the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter it will equal pi, I am not sure I would call it a religion.
                Why do people who have never done their own research always equate factual concepts with AGW? If the theory was as air tight as is said by the pundits we wouldn't be in a global pause in temperature increases.

                EVERY time you take the ratio of any circle's circumference to its diameter is will always equal pi. However, only in some cases has a massive increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide coincided with increased global temperatures.
                "Faith is nothing but a firm assent of the mind : which, if it be regulated, as is our duty, cannot be afforded to anything but upon good reason, and so cannot be opposite to it."
                -John Locke

                "It's all been melded together into one giant, authoritarian, leftist scream."
                -Newman

                "Grievance groups are playing King of the Hill."
                -Newman

                Comment

                • Adam
                  The way to a woman's heart is through her taste buds.
                  • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                  • 16885

                  #9
                  Originally posted by scott View Post
                  Why do people who have never done their own research always equate factual concepts with AGW? If the theory was as air tight as is said by the pundits we wouldn't be in a global pause in temperature increases.

                  EVERY time you take the ratio of any circle's circumference to its diameter is will always equal pi. However, only in some cases has a massive increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide coincided with increased global temperatures.
                  Beat me to it. Tyson unfortunately blows a hole in his own soliloquy by insisting that "we can always predict the climate." Well, Neil, I hate to tell you, but to date, every single climate prediction that has been made has been wrong. Every. Single. One.

                  Never once
                  has a single climate prediction been correct by this bunch.

                  And not just a little wrong, but a LOT wrong.


                  If the climate is so predictable, then how is it that so many alleged scientists manage to consistently get it so incredibly wrong?



                  ETA: It's a shame about Cosmos. It started out so interesting, but they've decided to just turn it into another Leftist diatribe. Too bad. It could have been so much better.
                  It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
                  In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
                  Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
                  Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

                  Comment

                  Working...