It’s On. War Between Climate Deniers and Bill Nye

April 14, 2016

Climate denier Marc Morano is revving up a publicity push for his new anti-science movie, which to be honest I can’t remember the name of, but I am sure is destined to be a classic on the same shelf as “Reefer Madness”.

As P.T. Barnum once observed, “If you want to draw a crowd, start a fight”.  In fact, P.T. was know to occasionally pay some roughnecks to punch it out in front of his box offices to bring in the rubberneckers and rubes. So it is here.

After first advertising that Nye would be on a panel with (ahem) climate expert Sara Palin, Morano withdrew that claim, which kind of ticked Bill off.
Today, I get a note from Morano that he has outrageous video of Bill Nye claiming that climate deniers should be jailed. Actually, it all sounds pretty reasonable.

This meme is all about the panicky climate denial media’s response to the 500 pound gorilla quietly grooming itself in the living room – that is the steadily creeping #ExxonKnew story, where growing volumes of new evidence show that oil companies had good science and a working knowledge of what the effects of climate change would be decades ago, even as far back as the 60’s, according to new reports I’ll be highlighting soon.
The Fox News take is, Orwellian Big Brother gummint’ wants to make it illegal to be a science denying moron. Not so. Sara, have at it.

What’s illegal, and what an expanding number of Attorneys General are investigating, is whether big fossil fuel companies knew about the science, but went ahead and deliberately disinformed not only their customers, but actual investors, and shareholders about critical information that could have an impact on their bottom line.  That’s agin’ the law, guys.

Ignorance remains a freedom that climate deniers may proudly continue to exercise.

Raw Story:

Science Guy” Bill Nye fired back on Thursday against Marc Morano, whose group promoted him as part of a special screening of his climate-skeptic documentary next month.

“Marc Morano did not invite me to his movie but he said I refused to come after he did invite me — he was making that up,” Nye said in a video posted on his Facebook page. “It’s disingenuous, at best.”

Morano’s organization, Climate Depot, originally said Nye would “appear” at the May 2 event, which will include a showing of the film Climate Hustle as well as a panel discussion that will include former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

However, it was later reported that Nye will not be there; instead, the event — which is being simulcast in movie theaters around the US — will show clips of an interview Morano conducted with him. Nye said in his video that he agreed to speak to Morano on the condition that his own documentary crew be allowed to remain present.

“He had to concede a few points, let me say that — he had to concede a few points,” Nye recalled. “You probably heard. I said, ‘I’ll bet you that 2016 will be among the top 10 hottest years ever.’ And he said, ‘Of course it will be.’ And then I said, ‘I’ll bet you that the decade — 2010 to 2020 — will be the hottest decade on record.’ And he wouldn’t take that bet. I would’ve given him $10,000 on each of those two bets. But he didn’t take it. Because he knows the world’s getting warmer.”

Couldn’t find Morano’s trailer, but here’s one for Reefer Madness. You get the idea.

Advertisements

18 Responses to “It’s On. War Between Climate Deniers and Bill Nye”


  1. To be honest, it has real science rather than “anti-science” like the “reefer madness” twin known as “an inconvenient truth”


  2. Isn’t Morano’s film titled ‘Butthurt Madness’?

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Close, but I think it’s really “Brainfart Madness”. Most appropriate, since every time Morono opens his mouth, that’s what comes out.

  3. Sir Charles Says:

    I thought it was “Climate Hustler”

    Reminds me again on Nailin’ Palin 🙂


  4. It’s rather cool to hear Bill Nye speak so casually about the link of previous denial frauds that ended up in court and climate change disinformation. I wonder what went through Moranos head at that point? Did he feel anything at all? Generally people in denial have demons of doubt popping up in their head all the time as their rational mind is trying desperately to make them think more and stop acting on impulses. Most people have experienced this with regards to some vice they have. Generally a serious addiction can seriously ruin ones own life, but it often affects people that are close to you, like immediate family and friends. This is partially why we still allow people to smoke, yes its bad for you, but as long as you dont blow it in peoples faces you are fine, you are basically just ruining your own life (although in countries with free health care, like here in Norway, the smoking habit costs money for all tax payers, not only the smoker). The same can be said about serious obesity. Unregulated, the monkey is capable off all kinds of bad behaviour.

    Then consider that climate denial and the failure to act on the carbon pollution problem is in fact an “addiction” that can make the whole planet uninhabitable… So if we could punish people for oil spills and lying about the hazards of tobacco, I guess climate denial is a way more serious criminal activity if we choose to go down that route in the aftermath.

    Personally I think its still possible to educate people about past wrongdoings as this is certainly no time to go witch hunting but instead cooperate to fix this problem as its essentially a caused by all of us and our forefathers. There really is no excuse to be nilly-willy and debating about it anymore. We should be debating about both mitigation and energy transition on a massive global scale now.

  5. MorinMoss Says:

    Just because Palin has seen ice from her backyard, doesn’t make her a “climate expert”

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Why not? Inhofe can make a snowball and that makes him a “climate expert”. Just ask him (or the one who taught him all there is to know about climate—-his former aide Morono, who learned all about it while studying political science in college).


  6. When a political movement is enslaved to distorting situations totally out of proportion, but unable to prevent the public from verifying the veracity of the claims, it plants the seeds for its own destruction. You fellows still have not figured this out yet.

    • ubrew12 Says:

      The problem with your argument: there’s no political movement here. Climate deniers are questioning the Science behind AGW. The movement to counter them is, by definition, a scientific movement, and nothing else. If you agree that AGW is happening, but believe our policy response should be ‘do nothing’, then that’s a political movement. But if you don’t believe AGW is happening, then that’s ‘anti-Science’, same as flat-Earth believers. It’s a different level of denial, like not believing in gravity. And politics hasn’t even entered into that level of denial. Politics is like arguing for eating meat while some deniers out there are still questioning the value of food.

      • adcwonk Says:

        “If you agree that AGW is happening, but believe our policy response should be ‘do nothing’, then that’s a political movement.”

        And, for many, that’s exactly what it is. Those who fear government involvement in anything look for “evidence” that there is no global warming.

        Look, let’s call it as we see it. The GOP, rightly or wrongly, stands for less government regulations, etc., right? And of the politicians who refuse to admit global warming (Palin, Inhofe, etc.), almost all — or all? — are from the GOP. Not a coincidence.

        Confirmation bias, etc. (I’m unsure of the exact psychological term, but I assume you know what I mean).

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Hate to disagree, but denialism is virtually ALL “politics” (and psychology, and sociology, and economics, and anthropology, and political science, and even some religion), and Russell Cook’s BS is a prime example of that.

        Russell is a denier who NEVER mentions any science or answers any science-related questions that we put to him, and it’s not just that he has no science background.

        He is a propagandist who is waging psy-war here, not discussing science, as he must because the science IS so settled and irrefutable that all deniers can do is lie about it. As long as the scientists and those of us who understand the reality of AGW just keep arguing the science “and nothing else”, we will make little progress against the deniers like Russell who project their failings and beliefs on us as he did in this comment. What some have “not figured out yet” is Russell’s game.


    • Why, Russell, you lovely russett troll, you describe the Denier movement perfectly! And it IS a shame you haven’t figured it out yet. I doubt you will. But, alas, I indulge only my fancy for mockery, and feeding time is over. Back under the bridge you go, there’s a good fellow.

    • Lionel Smith Says:

      “You fellows still have not figured this out yet.”

      Said the Mad Hatter into the looking glass.

  7. SmarterThanYourAverageBear Says:

    http://www.braidwoodtimes.com.au/story/3848574/old-news-goes-viral/

    A Facebook post by the Braidwood Museum has gone viral with 1677 shares, reaching over 112,606 people. Braidwood Historical Society committee Member John Stahel found this small article about the dangers of coal consumption while trawling through some old copies of the Braidwood Dispatch and Mining Journal from 17th July 1912.

    The brief article read…

    “COAL CONSUMPTION AFFECTING CLIMATE.

    The furnaces of the world are now burning about 2,000,000,000 tons of coal a year. When this is burned, uniting with oxygen, it adds about 7,000,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere yearly. This tends to make the air a more effective blanket for the earth and to raise its temperature. The effect may be considerable in a few centuries.”

  8. SmarterThanYourAverageBear Says:

    As for jailing deniers, when I get trolled by American deniers I like to troll them back by stating that the “Stand Your Ground” laws in many states and the near universal concept of justifiable self-defence suggests we should just take preemptive action and shoot them 🙂

  9. Lionel Smith Says:

    “…we should just take preemptive action and shoot them:)”

    That would be fine if the targets had substance, that leaves Russell the Cook off the menu.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: