Netflix Original: Bill Nye Saves The Earth

[SS Junk]

Funny cartoon, but I'm curious what you actually believe, and what your sources are.

There were plenty of doomsday predictions everyone agreed were "out there", but is it too hard to believe that with all the new satellites and technology that we can't hone in our predictions to something more accurate, and soon?

I don't put much faith in environmental science because of the "out there" claims that have been made past and present. Miss Cleo could give a better prediction as to what the future of the environment holds.

Bill Nye loses all credibility when praising shit like this:

[mschmoyer]

I don't put much faith in environmental science because of the "out there" claims that have been made past and present. Miss Cleo could give a better prediction as to what the future of the environment holds.

Bill Nye loses all credibility when praising shit like this:

So you blindly discredit future observations simply because you heard, maybe even falsely, that predictions in the past were inaccurate? Not to mention that most scientists didn't believe the ice age prediction in the first place?

It's as simple as looking up the research yourself, and not on FoxNews. (FYI, I'm republican). Read a lot of it. There's a consensus among intelligent folks.

What problem specifically do you have with that video, besides that it's goofy and she's a horrible singer?

[SS Junk]

So you blindly discredit future observations simply because you heard, maybe even falsely, that predictions in the past were inaccurate? Not to mention that most scientists didn't believe the ice age prediction in the first place?

There's nothing "blindly" about it. Who is to say more false predictions aren't going to be made by alleged credible sources which turn out to be false? Your faith base has to start somewhere just like mine.

What problem specifically do you have with that video, besides that it's goofy and she's a horrible singer?

The content is garbage, and most any sane person can easily see that.

[CWO]

There is a bazillion (rounding up) in Global Warming

http://www.wnd.com/2017/04/al-gore-group-demands-15-trillion-to-fight-global-warming/

[BP]

There is a bazillion (rounding up) in Global Warming

http://www.wnd.com/2017/04/al-gore-g...lobal-warming/

No no no, the left's current biggest issue is with the treatment of the LGTBQIA community in Chechnya. Somehow I guess a world war might be good for the environment?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/20/politics/hillary-clinton-lgbt-center/

[CWO]

NBD

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/24/former-obama-official-says-climate-data-was-often-misleading-and-wrong/?utm_campaign=atdailycaller&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social

[mschmoyer]

There's nothing "blindly" about it. Who is to say more false predictions aren't going to be made by alleged credible sources which turn out to be false? Your faith base has to start somewhere just like mine.

Give me a credible source then. Hopefully not a media conglomerate. Here's a good one:

https://climate.nasa.gov/

But if we're stuck on the earth being flat and a mythical moon landing then we're just two ships passing in the night here.

Note that not 20-30 years ago we just had the same argument about "smoking does not cause cancer". What changed everyone's minds about that? All the scientists agreed from the start...

[mschmoyer]

There is a bazillion (rounding up) in Global Warming

http://www.wnd.com/2017/04/al-gore-g...lobal-warming/

Ridiculous website. Don't recommend for ad-invasiveness alone.

Tell me what your trying to show me here. It's a conservative freak-out article about the carbon tax idea, which would be a "fee" administered by the gov't based on how much you pollute the earth. We have similar things already. Debating that issue is one thing... but nothing in this article denies or disputes climate change. Nothing in this article even describes how "al gore group" (uh, the gov't?) would get any money? So, how is this relevant?

[mschmoyer]

Was trying to wade through the others...

Can we please discredit any article that auto-plays ridiculous video ads and tries to sell me free credit scores with popups?

Instead, can you find me a NONPROFIT website source of whatever the heck we're trying to argue here? (aka nasa.gov, whitehouse.gov). Whatever "scientific" "political" or "faith" based argument you'd like to make, find me the source and I'll read it.

[SS Junk]

Is it el nino, global warming, climate change or whatever new catchy phrase which will fit your agenda? I can never keep up. I'm pretty sure the burden of proof is on your side regarding the demise of this planet because "THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED, BY GOLLY!"

[Gasser64]

When the experts are so wrong about the conclusion, you question the hypothesis.

Those experts should take geology 101.

[mschmoyer]

Is it el nino, global warming, climate change or whatever new catchy phrase which will fit your agenda? I can never keep up. I'm pretty sure the burden of proof is on your side regarding the demise of this planet because "THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED, BY GOLLY!"

I don't care about the terms, my agenda is to vote for people that simply let Solar/Wind/renewable energy win, like it would if oil&gas wasn't spreading lies and lobbying so much (similar to Tobacco). Coal is dying not because of regulation, but because enough people want the cool new stuff - renewable. Generate your own power and have negative electric bills? Sign me up. How about electric Tesla coupes that beat most cars in here at the drag strip? We need more of it.

Here's a different take -- we need this solar/wind/hippie energy because it reduces our reliance on terrorist oil&gas. Look at North Korea right now, they might be royally screwed because China took away their oil. Why not become a country that generates our own energy? Who cares about climate change...it's just smart, and financially doable.

So hate Al Gore all you want, and climate change for that matter, but it just makes sense that oil&gas will not sustain us for ever. Some of us believe its potentially deadly to gurgle down every last ounce of it on Earth, but there's other reasons to side with the renewable fans even if you don't believe that, as laid out above.

[SS Junk]

k...

[naynay]

And the winner by unanimous decision:

Corvette guy.

[sc281]

Will you backtrack and admit you just posted false news? Or, do as Bill Nye thinks anti-scientists will do, and double-down?

I will absolutely admit that cover is false news. Thank you for pointing it out.

I still stand by my words.

When you have climate scientists making claims like the North Pole will be ice free soon, and that it's humans fault, have bogus claims that are proved wrong by time, when the climate models are so off (hockey stick graph et al), you can see how one can come to the conclusion that there is information we are missing and/or don't understand fully.

And when those very claims and models are pointed to as empirical evidence to support trillions of dollars in legislation and taxpayer money to combat something we haven't even been able to predict or affect let alone measure accurately, you can see how these people and their data and conclusions based off of it become less respected and trusted over time, no?

I have no problem accepting a conclusion when the data is there and the prediction and testing supports it.

I have incredible problems when the conclusions outrun the data and aren't verifiable, when supposedly disinterested scientists become advocates, when Al Gore is able to take in 100's of millions without building anything, and when government gets involved to serve its political ends at our expense.




IPCC bogus claim that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html

49 NASA scientists dispute climate change

http://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-scientists-dispute-climate-change-2012-4

Al Gore claims in 2008 that North Pole would be ice free in 5 years

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/12/seven-years-ago-today-al-gore-predicted-north-pole-would-be-ice-free-in-five-years/

Dr Peter Wadhams of the univ of Cambridge in 2012: artic ice free by 2015 or 2016

http://www.takepart.com/article/2012/09/20/ice-free-north-pole-just-few-years-leading-scientist-says

IPCC and Mann's hockey stick graph

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/09/hockey-stick-graph-ipcc-report

Oh look, Al Gore wants the world's govt to spend 15 trillion over the next two decades to combat climate change.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/25/al-gores-new-group-demands-15-trillion-to-fight-global-warming/

A google search can find plenty more.