Bill Nye vs. Marc Morano on Global Warming

That would be Marc Morano,, who as a BS in polical science? (communications director for ... Senator Inhof,, the biggest climate denier in the senate).

"According to Climate Depot, Morano "has spent years researching climate change, environmental, and energy issues." [1]

Based on an interview with Morano, he appears to attribute his experience in climate science to his work with Howard Phillips and with Rush Limbaugh's television program where he worked on "Environmental Issues." [5]

According to Google Scholar, Marc Morano has never published research in a peer-reviewed journal on any subject. His only education appears to be in political science.


Desmogblog (Marc Morano)"

Marc Morano

Icarus

 

Neither debater impressed me too much.
Denying a role of CO2 in global temps (Marano) is not too realistic, but I am more in line with his action plan.
Bill Nye is more or less taking the conservative approach that we must assume the worst and that corrective actions are needed, although Pierce Morgan made some of that argument for him. Also Bill Nye seemed to say he feels electrification was the solution.

The contradiction I noticed - Bill Nye dismissed the ancient Roman warming period as an EU regional warming only, yet Hurricane Sandy, a really really local bad storm is taken by many as proof of global warming. So the climate alarmists seem to have the contradictory argument of, on the one hand, dismissing the Roman warmimg period as a local event, on the other hand accepting Hurricane Sandy impact on NYC as near-proof that severe global warming is here.

This relates to last week's post where learned from the aerospace engineer denier's slide show he used the Roman period as counter-proof of global warming, but we had no rebuttal. So Bill Nye gave some of the needed rebuttal.

 

Oh look. Another climate change denial thread by mojo.

 

Opinions are just awesome. That's your takeaway from this debate? Bill Nye didn't do a very good job debating his position. Being a scientist, I don't expect him to. Marc Morano just reminds me a of barking dog that won't listen. I'm kinda embarrassed he can't win a debate against someone who is supposed to be bad at it. He just kept yapping and yapping refusing to listen. That's not how you win a debate. That's how Bill O'Reilly conducts interviews.

I love Bill Nye's ending remark, "We just don't agree on the facts, so we're not going to get anywhere."

Kind of sums it up pretty good.

 

I concur!
See?
It's not hopeless.

 

One big problem is that our media always "tries" to insist the are two sis to every story, and each side has it's panel of experts equally qualified to argue his side. The fact is,, thee are NOT two sides to every issue. Some things are decided fact, and to argue the contrary is... Ridiculous!

To paraphrase what I said before: "so today on the Andy Blowhqrd show, we have a very important topic, infantile paralalsys. Joining us today are two reknown experts in the field,, Dr Jonas Saulk, inventer of the very successful vaccine than has nearly wipe polio off the face of the earth with few side effects. On the other side of the conversation is Jerrry Lamebrain, whose BS comes from the University of Idiocy, and who speaks frequently on the effect of lunar landings on butterfly behavior, so he is an "expert" ( but not in anything relevant to the topic at hand!) ans will share his learned opinions on how the is no evidence that the polio vaccine works,, only that people think it does...Back in a moment!"

There are not equal weights to all arguments. The earth is round, the earth is not he center of the universe, humans didn't walk the earth with Dino, gravity works, some people are smarter than others (some truths are hard to swallow) and...and humans have increased the concentrations of GHG, a known insulater, and the net result is, surprise, surprise, the planet is getting warmer!

Don't listen to or support idiocy!

Icarus