Skip to main content

CNN Anchor Tells Bill Nye He's Losing to Conservatives 'Politicizing' the Climate

CNN's Carol Costello told guest Bill Nye "The Science Guy" on Monday that climate change skeptics are "politicizing this issue" and "winning." Of course, the two did not admit to the possibility of man-made climate change believers doing the exact same thing.

"But the people who are politicizing this issue, they seem to be winning because not much is being done on the issue of climate change even though President Obama promised that, you know, back in the day, 2008," Costello said. [Video below the break. Audio here.]

For his part, Nye continued to scoff at climate change skeptics as he claimed that "the two sides aren't equal here" and that "tens of thousands of scientists" are concerned for the environment versus only "a few people" who are skeptics.

Nye also indirectly plugged for President Obama. "By the way, if you're a voter, consider taking the -- the environment into account as well as the economy. Consider including the environment," he pleaded.

"I think the two candidates running for president right now have very different views about the validity, for example, of science and the importance of it and what you would do about climate change in the coming years."

Costello issued another liberal lament when she asked "What will it take for America to be on the same page?" Nye replied that scientists "chip away at this problem all the time." Apparently on CNN, the conservatives need to be be won over on the issue, it will just take facts and time.

Costello did begin the interview by challenging Nye's credentials on the matter, since he is not a climatologist. "Let's talk about the political aspect of this, because if you google your name Bill Nye, you're the kooky guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. I mean, you're not a climatologist. You want to defend yourself?" she asked in a rather hostile opening question.

A transcript of the segment, which aired on July 2 on Newsroom at 10:15 a.m. EDT, is as follows:

CAROL COSTELLO: We want to talk more about the weather. It, like everything else, has become incredibly politicized. That's right, we're going to talk about climate change. In today's Washington Post, there's a study conducted by EchoSphere, a peer-reviewed journal of ecologists. It projected most of North America will witness a jump in the frequency of wildfires by the end of the century, mostly because of increasing temperatures.

But this study was done by ecologists, scientists, and will likely be looked at skeptically. Bill Nye, "The Science Guy," is here to explain the science behind our weather extremes. Good morning.

BILL NYE, "The Science Guy": Good morning.

COSTELLO: Let's talk about the political aspect of this, because if you google your name Bill Nye, you're the kooky guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. I mean, you're not a climatologist. You want to defend yourself?

NYE: Sure. I can read graphs. And this – there's a couple of things you can't really dispute. 16 of the last 17 years have been the hottest years on record. That's – that's just how it is. Now I appreciate that we want to show two sides of the story, and this is a tradition in journalism that goes back quite a ways, I guess. But the two sides aren't equal here. You have tens of thousands of scientists who are very concerned and you have a few people who are in the business of equating – or drawing attention to the idea that uncertainty is the same as doubt. When you have a plus or a minus percentage, that's not the same as not believing the whole thing at all. And by the way everybody, we have record high temperatures. We have enormous fires in Colorado. We had tornadoes in Michigan and Brooklyn. We had a 30-degree temperature drop in Maryland and Virginia this weekend, in just – in a half-hour. These are consistent with climate models –  

(Crosstalk)

COSTELLO: Well let me ask you this – let me ask you this. Because out west, there are experts who say part of the problem with these wildfires is that it's mismanagement of our forests, there hasn't been forests cleared of brush, for example, and that's why these wildfires have really spread so quickly. Not necessarily because of the heat.

NYE: Well, I've got to disagree. It is because of the heat ultimately. Just two years ago it was wet in Colorado, and there was a lot of growth in forests, and then you can say, well, responsibly you should have cleared that growth. It's a difficult thing, so then two years later when it's especially dry and the forest floor gets especially dry and then there's a lightning strike, the fire is that much more intense than it would have been.

Now, since this -- you brought it up as politics, to us it's science, this is a deep concern, and wouldn't you want the United States, I grew up here, I don't know any better. Wouldn't you want the United States to be the world leader in addressing climate change and innovating and energy distribution and storage? Wouldn't you want that?

COSTELLO: But the people who are politicizing this issue, they seem to be winning because not much is being done on the issue of climate change even though President Obama promised that, you know, back in the day, 2008.

NYE: Well, I think you're going to have to wait. I mean, I'm not – I think you're going to have to wait until after the election. By the way, if you're a voter, consider taking the -- the environment into account as well as the economy. Consider including the environment. I think the two candidates running for president right now have very different views about the validity, for example, of science and the importance of it and what you would do about climate change in the coming years.

You know, other countries are addressing climate change, but the United States is the world's largest economy, and by long tradition, whether it's an iPhone or methods of growing food to feed a lot of people, the United States has been the world leader in this sort of innovative technology.

COSTELLO: So what will it take --

NYE: Do you want to keep that up or not?

COSTELLO: What will it take for America to be on the same page? I mean, what will it take?

NYE: Well, we in the science education community chip away at this problem all the time. We have an enormous population of people in the United States who don't believe in evolution, the fundamental idea in all of life science. It would like saying I don't believe in earthquakes or something. I mean, the analogies are disturbing, but, in other words, science is a process, and we -- we want everybody to understand it. And then include science in the way you do your thinking about how you're going to vote and how you're going to conduct your life, so you -- you can attack me – people can attack me personally, but it is -- this is the, as I say, 16 warmest years on record over the last 17.

1996 was not one of the warmest because there was a big El Nino, but that aside everybody I think has a sense that the world – in the United States anyway, the world is getting warmer. The storms are being – are stronger than ever, and our ability to respond to them is not especially good to combine all of these ideas.

COSTELLO: Bill Nye --

NYE: And so the wildfires in Colorado are probably another symptom of the subtle slow change that's happening around the world.

COSTELLO: You threw that "probably" word in which is why people are confused.

NYE: What are you going to do? You can't prove every weather event, but sooner or later everybody,  let's change the world. Let's work together and make life for future generations as good as it was, for example, mine. Really, everybody.

COSTELLO: Thank you.

NYE: "Probably" doesn't mean it's all wrong, really. Good morning.
 

Comments

#1 That's too bad

I loved this guy growing up. And besides, Obama breaks promises to everybody; the climate nazis should be no different.

#2 freedom is killing the planet

There are actually two issues:

one: Is climate change caused by man?

two: If climate change is happening can man stop it?

The alarmists especially don't want to discuss the second question. They want people to agree with their position on the first question and then automatically assume that the alarmists have the solution.

The reason the alarmists can't sell climate change is because they can't point to undeniable proof of Climate Change and they present the solution to climate change as political initiatives. It's going to be a hard sell to tell the average Joe that the worlds weather will be altered by brilliantly inspired laws coming out of government. Laws that give the government complete control over everything Joe owns and everything Joe does.

What do you call a Volt owner in the recent storm affected areas? A pedestrian.

#3 I believe in points one and

I believe in points one and two and still firmly disagree with the hack Bill Nye and his idol Al Gore.

Because of point three:

The rate of climate change is drastic enough to need drastic change.

I believe climate change is real and I believe a portion of it is man made. But I don't believe the REAL changes are significant enough to warrant the liberal's drastic action.

Furthermore, Al gore and other liberals aren't serious about adapting to the problem. Even if you believe it is real, "reducing" carbon emissions doesn't fix the problem. It only slows down the rate at which you approach the problem. Because you're also "emitting" there is always an excuse for further drastic action that needs to be taken to aid the companies Al Gore and friends have started.

#4 Like saying I don't believe in earthquakes.

Is this guy for real? He is saying that if you are a Christian and believe in the Bible that you don't believe in earthquakes. Earthquakes can be proved, evolution can not be proved. Can this "science guy" give us proof of any evolution taking place at any time anywhere? I'll answer that. No he can't. By the way earthquakes are mentioned in the Bible.

#5 Now you've done it !

All Liberals who read your post are now confused because you mentioned facts. ;-)

#6 I can't believe this idiot said that with a straight face

Does she live in a vault?

Where has she been for the last 20+ years?

-Dave

Vote for the American in November

#7 You move thermometers to roof tops this is what you get.

GHCNv.2 station locations are biased toward urban and cropland (>50% stations versus 18.4% of the world’s land) and past century reclaimed cropland areas (35% stations versus 3.4% land).

The new IPCC reports should heed this growing call for a broader, more complete assessment of threats to the environment and society, rather than their scientifically flawed focus on the radiative effects of CO2 and a few other greenhouse gases.

The forests in Colorado are in their climax stage, they are sick and dieing.... Save the trees for the next fire ah greenies..

#8 They can focus on the...

radiative effects of Co2 until they're blue in the face.

It will not change the fact that they are talking about a one degree change in 150+ years by increasing Co2 levels from 288ppm in 1850 to 388ppm today. When you add that to the fact that the "man made" part of the equation is less than 5ppm, then nobody can take you or your dire predictions for the future, seriously.

So to sum it up for you again... When a third grader with a $2 calculator can make you and your theory look dumb, you really need to find another way of explaining your position.

Science is not some great mystery to most people, it's just not their main focus. That does not make them dumb enough to buy a blatant and childish attempt at a power grab, by the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Fraud.

God Bless America!

#9 My dream interview

I would love William Sanford Nye, "The Statist Guy" (MSNBC, hire him) to debate Samuel Joseph "the Plumber" Wurzelbacher. The latter would tear the former to shreds!

#10 Nye is just another moonbat

Nye is just another moonbat who worships at the feet of 'Earth Mother' Gaea and won't hear any evidence to the contrary. Scientists are supposed to go into a theory under the assumption that it's WRONG. But not the 'scientists' who have drunk the global warming kool-aid. They go in firmly believing that they're RIGHT, and ignore any evidence that disproves it. Bill Nye is therefore the exact opposite of a scientist - he's a convert to the religion of Al Gore.

If a Liberal/Democrat politician/media figure wants to put their arms around you, or pat you on the back, all they're doing is looking for a good place to stick a knife.

#11 Pretty obvious who's playing politics

One of the biggest pushers of the AGW alarm admits the IPCC is all about politics.

Mike
your words are a real boost to me at the moment. I found myself questioning the whole
process and being often frustrated at the formulaic way things had to be done - often
wasting time and going down dead ends. I really thank you for taking the time to say these
kind words . I tried hard to balance the needs of the science and the IPCC , which were not
always the same
...

Kieth Briffa

Lead Author IPCC/Greenpeace/WWF AR 4, Chapter 6

#12 And it's always been about politics

The Kyoto Treaty was a political document, permitting China and India -- two of the world's largest carbon producers -- to escape the quotas levied on other industrial countries, because they wouldn't have signed up to it had they been restricted.

Also, while these two talked about the government and us doing "something," they deftly skirted around the term anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Nye claims that tens of thousands of scientists agree on climate change, but failed to mention that tens of thousands of other scientists signed a document stating that AGW was not science.

#13 "It's just weather!"

Remember that admonition drafted by the alarmists when it was snowy and cold, not only in the U.S. but Asia and Europe as well? Just try to say that the recent heat wave/storminess is "just weather" and you'll be vilified..

CLIMATEGATE - the revelation that the pseudo-scientists at East Anglia University know just as much about the atmosphere as Harvard law professors know about the Constitution

#14 Oh look!

A guy with a degree in Mechanical Engineering telling us about the weather.

I'll just go to a chef and ask him about detailed human anatomy, that makes just as much sense.

-Jon

#15 Engineers

The Oompa Loompas of Science. - Sheldon (Big Bang Theory)

#16 That show

If anything, that show is really good at teaching the differences between science and reality(engineering) to the average lay person a lot more than people like Bill Nye ever would.

Plus it's friggin hilarious.

-Jon

#17 Very Funny Show Jon

My wife, who has the same degree as Bill Nye, thought that line was hilarious. I never thought to ask her expert opinion climate change though.

#18 Nye is just another godless

Nye is just another godless Commie, the bowtie and lab coat is just a schtick.

#19 No Change-y

The "no climate change" people are winning simply because it has been established that there is no provable man-made climate change going on.

Now, wasn't that easy?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.