Join the debate

Jump in the Crossfire by using #Crossfire on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

Jump in the Crossfire by using #Crossfire
on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

May 6th, 2014
09:31 PM ET

Bill Nye: Climate change is our most urgent, number one priority right now.

Bill Nye the Science Guy debates climate change with Nick Loris of the Heritage foundation, S.E. Cupp and Van Jones.

Cupp: should we all just be vegetarians then?
S.E. Cupp challenges Bill Nye the Science Guy on climate change by asking if everyone should be vegetarians.

Cupp takes on Hillary Clinton on guns
S.E. Cupp is outraged that Hillary Clinton was fear-mongering on guns in her latest speech.

Posted by
Filed under: Bill Nye • Climate Change • Debates • Nick Loris • Outrage of the Day • S.E. Cupp • Van Jones
soundoff (481 Responses)
  1. BillyD1953

    I guess when a denialists debates a scientist it's considered bullying if the scientist actually relies on his or her scientific knowledge and understanding when confronted with the utter hocus pocus nonsense of his or her opponent in the debate, i.e., the presumptuous denialist who feels entitled to pontificate endlessly on topics they know absolutely nothing about.

    May 8, 2014 at 7:47 am | Reply
    • Me

      B. Nye is NOT a scientist or professor no degree or doctorate. He is an actor. Now my question is why won't they interview a real scientist from both sides of the aisle. I guess they won't play the game and lie to the people

      May 9, 2014 at 8:40 am | Reply
      • tracie

        Well, Bill is a scientist. He has contributed much to the scientific community and continues to do so today so I don't know why you would assume that he's just a tv with no knowledge of what he's talking about.

        May 10, 2014 at 12:49 am |
    • moreofthislessofthat

      And by science guy, he means he worked as an engineer at Boeing for several years before he quit to pursue a career in comedy. He has no science training or background. He had a science discovery show geared toward 5th and 6th graders. So he is probably competent to tell us how much energy it takes to heat a gallon of water one degree, but not much more.

      May 9, 2014 at 11:31 pm | Reply
  2. Shaking My Head

    Wow. The idea that people would fight making the earth a better place is mind boggling. All these anti climate change idiots must have disgusting houses. Or is it that they are just to stupid to realize that when you leave your house you still haven't left home. See cause your house is on earth. Humans home.

    May 8, 2014 at 7:28 am | Reply
    • Me

      Because it is not being conducted in a rational way. B nye is not a scientist, real scientists have tried to speak out that the numbers have been tweaked to fit the climate change agenda. We have an EPA that has so many regulations to protect the earth companies are moving to other countries just to stay in business because of the high taxes, that we will pay (carbon tax) this is a money grabbing scheme

      May 9, 2014 at 8:47 am | Reply
      • KB

        It is mind boggling. I read a story on Fox about Apple and their efforts to use a variety of Green alternatives to power one of their data centers. One of the ways they were saving was with the use of Bloom Boxes that use a newer type of fuel cell.
        They used all of their tried and true methods to try to make this look bad. They trot out one of their fake scientists to mock the technology. Try to make it look like it's some kind of scam.
        And the choir buys it! The story line, Green is bad. Oil is good, Fracking is good.
        We will need to live with this story line until alternative energy can provide the kind of profits that it takes to buy influence.

        May 9, 2014 at 11:46 am |
    • moreofthislessofthat

      We are "too stupid" not "to stupid" smart guy. Not sure how spending hundreds of billions on the left wing "fixes" like cap and trade and Kyoto, which everyone knows won't help at all, would make the world a better place. I know it would impoverish the west and particularly the USA. But I am sure that is not the real goal.

      May 9, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
  3. Elveto Drozo

    "Scare tactics" is just irresponsible language to use by a journalist washing her hands of the issue. Science is about establishing and using methods to escape common-sense biases to approach reality. It so happened that scientists, so doing, attain and nearly unanimously so, conclusions that they themselves find scary. Naturally, they can't do otherwise than expose how they reach these conclusions, and naturally, common sense finds the material less than convincing and groks little more than an intent to communicate fear. But that's really a failure not of the scientist but of the journalist, as effective communication of news to the public isn't the scientist's job but the journalist's.

    May 8, 2014 at 5:28 am | Reply
  4. Ming Pan

    "I'm not a denier but..." sounds suspiciously like "I'm not a racist but..." Hey jerks, stfu and let someone who knows something about science actually speak! Condescending pieces of crap, the only one who was bullied was Bill Nye.

    May 8, 2014 at 5:02 am | Reply
  5. Trey Thompson

    My comment wont be seen. let me reiterate....
    My favorite part is that they are agreeing with him, while trying to disprove him at the same time with much disrespect. They are trying to hindsight the situation so they can take the credit. They are ratings gluttons, when all Bill is trying to do is get past all of that. It's as simple as that.

    May 8, 2014 at 4:56 am | Reply
  6. Trey Thompson

    My favorite part is that they are agreeing with him, while trying to disprove him at the same time with much disrespect. They are trying to hindsight the situation so they can take the credit. They are ratings whores, when all Bill is trying to do is get past all of that. It's as simple as that.

    May 8, 2014 at 4:52 am | Reply
  7. Talavar

    Is global warming real? Sure it is! ...........Is Man made global warming real? Humanity must really have had the need to feel self important to come up with that one......

    May 8, 2014 at 3:45 am | Reply
    • Cedar Rapids

      Never understood this argument. I believe the arrogance of man is the very reverse......that it is arrogant to think man can do whatever it likes to the planet and it wont affect it.

      May 8, 2014 at 11:36 am | Reply
  8. Kenneth Baumann

    Holy shit this is funny as hell!

    May 8, 2014 at 1:26 am | Reply
  9. Tom

    So you people just invited Bill to just bully him with your stupidity...Seriously media sheep who will you believe a bunch a people who preplanned by reading Wikipedia, pulling statistics from no where in an attempt to make themselves look good or a group of scientists whose daily job is to watch over and study natural/man made occurrences in the world? scientist who go to gatherings, publish research that then is tested by several other scientists to be true, people who make 5x what these hacks make just try to bully someone far superior.

    May 8, 2014 at 1:06 am | Reply
  10. some guy

    I think this all boils down to one thing. How often is the weather report correct? Yeah, that's what I thought, almost never. So when we nail that, I think we have a shot at understanding climate change. Let's tackle one thing at a time folks.

    May 8, 2014 at 12:54 am | Reply
    • Cedar Rapids

      Was that a sarcastic post? I ask because of course predicting the weather and climate are 2 entirely different things.

      May 8, 2014 at 11:37 am | Reply
    • bikeamtn

      For all those who didn’t get that point Cedar Rapids made; let’s simplify the details in the differences of ‘Local Weather’ and ‘Climate’ behavior/perdition. (disclaimer: this is an off the top illustration, some may have another version)

      ‘Local Weather’ is like; I’m going to guess how many times I can correctly shoot the basketball through the hoop by calculating muscle strength, height, wind speed/direction and distance.

      ‘Climate’ is like; I open the door in the morning of Mar. 20th and see the sunrise equal with my neighbors roof now if I return to open the door in 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4.1 seconds from now, the sun will be in the same spot but slightly to the left.

      Now if you really wish to understand more about the example, you could research why I included the date and why the sun’s slight motion to the left occurred.
      Hope that’s of help.

      May 8, 2014 at 7:37 pm | Reply
  11. Shawn

    "Look into my eyes and tell me....." that is exactly the question people wanted to hear. Wasted my time trying to listen to Bill Nye and get some facts/ opinions from him. All I received was a 10min segment of this dumb woman talking over Bill and asking childish questions that she didn't want to hear the answers to. The worst news show I've seen. Future viewer? No I am not.

    May 7, 2014 at 11:57 pm | Reply
  12. pjoe

    Climate change = obscure apology by the "debate is over" "GLOBAL WARMING" crowd for being wrong.

    May 7, 2014 at 11:26 pm | Reply
  13. Eagle0541

    Here is what the nut case who lead OBAMA's hand picked committee thinks:

    Holdren has written: “Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently [severe and] endanger society.”

    Among Holdren’s ideas? A sterility drug in drinking water.

    And you liberals give this extremist Global Warming religionists credibility?

    May 7, 2014 at 10:45 pm | Reply
    • BRP

      According to politifact, that's nowhere near true. That's something Glenn Beck claimed in July of 2009. You can find the fact-checked article by doing a quick search with the quote you used. We don't need to worry about this one.

      May 7, 2014 at 11:08 pm | Reply
      • chr

        No, but we need to worry about nutcases like Eagle0541 who blindly believe that rubbish.

        May 8, 2014 at 8:35 am |
    • Lecho

      ...so we should disbelieve science because you believe stupid made up things. Such ironic use of the word religion. Flawless logic, to be certain.

      May 8, 2014 at 1:42 am | Reply
    • Nathan Lee Bush

      If you use all caps when you write Obama it makes it more truer. Derp Republican logic.

      May 8, 2014 at 2:21 am | Reply
    • frunobulax718

      "And you liberals give this extremist Global Warming religionists credibility?"

      Ah, the irony is rich here.

      May 8, 2014 at 6:11 am | Reply
    • Cedar Rapids

      http://www(dot)politifact(dot)com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/29/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-claims-science-czar-john-holdren-propos/

      If you want to be outraged at something then make sure you are being outraged at something real, not made up.

      May 8, 2014 at 10:21 am | Reply
  14. Vincent M. Casiano

    S,E. Cupp is so obviously biased as was clearly evidenced by her use of the words scare tactics and bullying when it comes to the science of global warming. Another reason why I won't watch CNN anymore to get a fair perspective on today's current affairs.

    May 7, 2014 at 10:29 pm | Reply
    • Bob Hasfleas

      Yes, and that's your problem. Bringing in biased people from both sides isn't "objective" or "balanced"; it's just making noise. I'm sick of journalism that pretends all views are equally credible and shrugs its shoulders: "These people say this; these other people say that. Let's have them talk over each other for five minutes."

      To quote Daniel Okrent, writer and former editor of Esquire, Life, and TIME (among others) and former public editor of The New York Times, "The pursuit of balance can create imbalance because sometimes something is true."

      When it comes to global warming in particular, 97% of the scientists who study climate say that the evidence shows that global warming is happening and that it is caused by humans. There is some disagreement on the severity of the problem, but according to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report we should expect higher temperatures, increased drought, heavy precipitation events, and rising sea levels through AT LEAST 2100. (They don't do a lot of examination of past 2100.)

      May 8, 2014 at 4:26 am | Reply
    • Julie T

      Exactly. I hate when "journalists" put their politics (usually paid corporate interests) into their programs. It is NOT journalism. It is a commercial for plundering the earth for special interests: the elites, the 1% of the 1%ers. I no longer watch news, as there is no such thing anymore. I get my info from the internet.

      May 8, 2014 at 4:54 am | Reply
    • frunobulax718

      "Both sides" implies that there are only two views on any topic. This is what is called a "false dichotomy" in logic.

      And, by coincidence, it is also what is wrong with American governance, and it seems to have affected American media and journalism as well.

      Yes, there are Liberals and Conservatives; sure. But there are plenty of us who cry "a pox on both their houses!"

      In this instance - global warming - it seems that one party is following a path to death and destruction that will lead to the end of civilization or even the extinction of our species by the end of the century. And the other party is ten times worse!

      If Crossfire were truly representative of American politics, there would be three factions represented: Liberals, Conservatives and the independents. Look at the voter registration roles (and, for the fun of it, incorporate the voter-eligible that aren't registered) and tell me which of the three is the largest.

      Take a poll, CNN, and tell me whether voters vote *for* one candidate or *against* the other. That right there will tell you what you need to know about this false dichotomy.

      May 8, 2014 at 6:22 am | Reply
    • osgar

      Right, Divide and Rule.

      May 8, 2014 at 9:13 am | Reply
  15. CNN truth

    I don't believe the scientist. I believe the guys and gals with the GED.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:40 pm | Reply
    • John Culley

      Bill Nye the science guys gets sloppy in this debate. He correctly identifies that there is a difference over the facts but fails to address exceptions to his broad generalizations about climate change that bring into question his generalizations. Neither side adequately deals with causation. What if the sun is the cause of global warming? What about politician/scientist the late Dixie Lee Ray who predicted human activity would cause global cooling and not global warming?

      May 7, 2014 at 10:49 pm | Reply
      • Brandon

        Bill Nye may have been sloppy but Nicolas was the epitome of a disrespectful human being. Let the man speak.

        May 7, 2014 at 11:46 pm |
      • Mark W

        Are you aware that solar insolation has been studied to death in recent decades, and absolutely ruled out as the cause of the recent decadal warming? Do you realize that during the time of this unprecedented warming, the trend has been a *decrease* in solar output?

        I can't believe people are still posting drivel like this. Did you just wake up and get interested in this yesterday?

        Do you make similar blind, uninformed assertions on medical issues? "What if heart disease isn't caused by blockage in the arteries but rather little magic fairies that get in through our eyelids when we sleep? Let's hold off on those scary surgeon general reports urging people to cut down on saturated fats, because I'm not up to speed on this issue yet and I'm taking my sweet time."

        May 8, 2014 at 1:41 am |
      • Nathan Lee Bush

        What if every scientist in the world (not on Exxon Mobil payroll) is wrong?!?

        May 8, 2014 at 2:26 am |
      • Nik

        Just like they mentioned in the video above, TV personalities love to cherry pick .1% of studies and use that as evidence to disprove of the 99.9% of evidence that goes against it. For something to have scientific backing it needs a wide spread global repeatability. The vast majority of studies that oppose global warming (or predicted global cooling) are the few outliers which provide no value and are often unrepeatable.

        May 8, 2014 at 3:30 am |
      • Allen

        It is very hard to accurately get your point across when you are being cut off every time you speak. He couldn't really get a word in to complete every point he was trying to make. You could see how aggrevated Bill was getting as they continually interrupted him. I have seen Bill Nye when he actually gets to speak and no doubtedly so have they. Had they let him continue he wold have brought up all of the valid points but, they didn't.

        May 8, 2014 at 5:27 am |
      • James

        I wouldn't say that he's sloppy in the debate, its just that he tries to make a point and they keep cutting him off and wont let him finish a single thought.

        May 8, 2014 at 6:54 am |
      • jw

        Globa warming is the debate over if human are changing the climate not the sun or nature........Clinton2016

        May 8, 2014 at 10:17 am |
      • Cedar Rapids

        'What about politician/scientist the late Dixie Lee Ray who predicted human activity would cause global cooling and not global warming?'

        Global cooling was a claim made by a handful of scientists in the 70s. It was never accepted as a mainstream idea and the only reason you ever heard about it was because the media love a good end of the world story.

        May 8, 2014 at 11:39 am |
  16. Tim

    I wish I would be living long enough to see the decisions and results of those decisions. First let me say, I am not a climate change denier. The climate is like life itself is constantly changing. Climate is dynamic, not static. Climate is a system that will always seek a balance and everything, from a simple one cell organism, will result in climate change over time. So, arguing if the climate is changing or not is foolish. The argument, really, is the human ability to understand the ongoing changes. I really do not believe we are capable of truly understanding as chances to climates are far reaching and go beyond our sun. We do understand a lot, on a very small scale. And within our extremely limited understanding it seems like we know more than we truly do. I also believe in the scientific process but I also understand it is simply a process and will someday be found to be an imprecise process and change. I also understand that our brains are constructed such that we really do not see the world as it is. Science is just starting to understand how the brain works but it is becoming clear that how we perceive the world is imprecise and polluted by our experience and biological capabilities, or incapabilities. So, what interests me is how we seek to... what....stop the climate from changing? We will not. We can only create an experiment to make changes and then record what changes happen along the way and then try and determine why those changes occurred and if it was, or was not, due to our activities. The scary thing, and most interesting, is how science has been well known to create larger problems than those sought to remedy problems before us. Does anyone think we are capable of controlling climate or, at least, our ability to not create a situation that may be even more harmful? After all, science, as wonderful as it is, is a human process and, as such, has built in minefields. Hard to get angry over the argument that no one is capable of knowing the outcome. Wish I could be around to see how far off we are, after all, what about the weather do we predict with great confidence now?

    May 7, 2014 at 9:36 pm | Reply
    • Guile Williams

      Climate changes, yes. Can we stop it? No. Are we causing a lot of the change that makes it less hospitable? Yes, to believe otherwise would be foolish. The polar ice caps are melting, the ocean has risen about 1.5 ft. the over all temperature of the planet is rising. The evidence is right in front of everyone yet people still deny it.

      May 7, 2014 at 10:30 pm | Reply
      • Ryan

        Yet, the question remains... is it primarily caused by human activity or is it mostly caused by natural processes? That's exactly the question Tim is posing. One thing is certain, however. Regardless of whether it's human activity or natural processes that are causing the climate to fluctuate the way it is today, we should still look into renewable energy and develop "greener" technologies and sustainable lifestyles... and the only thing that's keeping us back from getting there is Washington, DC.

        May 7, 2014 at 11:32 pm |
    • Lecho

      This is analogous to saying there is no clear harm in smoking because you are going to die anyways. On the flipside, reducing the amount of damage we do to our habitat is NOT analogous to "controlling the climate". No.

      May 8, 2014 at 1:45 am | Reply
  17. Why doesn't

    Why doesn't SE Cupp do something constructive and bake us some cookies? Or just draw us a picture of some cookies? OK?

    May 7, 2014 at 9:33 pm | Reply
    • Iz

      Haha, yeah it's just cnn trying to cash in a bit on the Fox News strategy. Get some moderately attractive female with much lesser qualification than plenty of candidates out there (hey, at least she got her art history degree at Cornell, which is a good school) and have her spout conservative talking points. The second clip here makes me think she doesn't know what straw man means.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:57 pm | Reply
      • cs

        I was thinking the same thing! Amazing how there are probably more intelligent women in the world but they keep touting the Bachman's, Palin's, Hasselbachs.. ect ect as if these women spoke for all conservative women.. which they don't actually... I'm an old school republican not a neo-con.. and I'm sick to death of the media touting these fringe nutterbutters as the Republican norm.. they are causing the collective IQ of the GOP to go down daily!

        May 7, 2014 at 11:23 pm |
  18. A. Thought

    what are you doing cnn?? oh right ! trying to confuse everyone until they have no idea whats going on!
    here's what that "debate" rounds out to
    How can we get the word out about climate change?
    keep telling people.
    that doesnt work.
    'm a climate change believer.
    there is no evidence to support climate change.
    well your not going to listen to me.
    your a bully, no wonder no one listens to you.

    a BULLY? come on cnn, you guys were clearly antagonizing him the whole time just like you were told before the interview waiting for him to lose his cool and then you went in for the kill. you are the worst news network on air.
    ceaselessly reminding me of my grade 10 drama class. terrible scripts.worse acting, and shitty skits meant to turn our attention in one direction or pull at my emotions.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:27 pm | Reply
    • Logan Marada

      Seriously! Talk about being awful hosts to your very decorated and qualified guest. It was hardly a debate because every time Nye tried to get a point in, he got shouted over. Obviously there is conflicting statistics, and no wonder! There receiving their evidence from two sources that most likely have conflicting viewpoints themselves. Maybe there will be a day in the future where our great great grandkids will be damning us for not being sustainable with resources and actually creating some kind of harmful climate change. Who knows? I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist or anything about it, but why do we close the book on such an issue, just because bad things haven't happened yet? Are we waiting?

      May 8, 2014 at 12:48 am | Reply
    • john

      the only scientists that promote climate change are the one s that have a financial interest. Meterologist will tell you there is no evidence to support it since we have not kept records long enouph to know what is natural and what is not.Evidence in ice cores shows CO2 was much higher in the past than now.Also all planets in the solar system are heating up so who is causing that.

      May 8, 2014 at 1:48 am | Reply
  19. Brainglue

    Why is this silly cunt of a woman arguing with one of the smartest men in the field of global warming? She's a journalist who blew her way to being on the panel of a major news network show. Bill's only mistake was giving these people the opportunity to challenge him on television and talk over him without giving him time to respond to their scientifically-illiterate minds. Ah, but it's amusing stuff, gotta give Bill a ton of credit for keeping his cool with these people, who were clearly trying to get under his skin. The agenda here was to make Bill Nye lose his cool and say something foolish so they could make more headlines out of it, but they failed.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:26 pm | Reply
    • OldMo

      I agree that Bill the eugenicist guy Nye probably is "one of the smartest men in the field of global warming" which tells you all you really need to know about the scam. As a mechanical engineer he's probably more qualified than a guy like Al Gore to talk about man-made global warmi. . .I mean "climate change". Btw, Gore teamed with Ken Lay of Enron fame and Goldman Sachs biggies to conjure up a carbon trading scheme so you know the whole thing has to be on the up and up.
      Hey, instead of calling people the "c" word on the internet why don't you take some time and research stuff like Agenda 21 and the Report from Iron Mountain. This b.s. about coming up with an environmental boogeyman to control all peoples was dreamed up in the 60s (and likely earlier). If you're old enough, you'll remember that it was an ice age that was supposedly going to do us all in. Judging by your post I'm going to guess you're in your late teens or early 20s and were probably indoctrinated with this propaganda from the get-go so you're a lot more likely to become a mark. Go do some legwork young fella and never buy what the establishment is trying to sell you.

      May 8, 2014 at 6:48 am | Reply
  20. Mary Brown

    This idea that "all scientists agree" and everyone else is a "knuckledragger" is just propaganda. Many, many qualified and capable scientists completely disagree with Bill Nye and CAGW (catastrophic anthropogenic global warming).

    Turn off the talking heads and do some reading. Below are some very scientific "skeptic" blogs where the science is debated. I can assure you, the science is far from settled.

    http://judithcurry.com/
    http://rankexploits.com/musings/
    http://www.drroyspencer.com/

    May 7, 2014 at 9:23 pm | Reply
    • MaryBrownIsAnIdiot

      So then, you pulled out three links. So it's your assertion that there has to be 100% agreement before something can be considered fact? This isn't a court of law, dearie. There will always be at least one bagger who thinks that the world is flat, and so therefore the world isn't round until this person comes to their mind?

      Please. The case has LONG be settled on this. The results have followed the theories and hypotheses, and really, only bagger "scientists" (those who don't care, because "end times" are coming soon) disagree.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:47 pm | Reply
      • Mary Brown

        My assertion is that the burden of proof lies with those making the claims of catastrophe. With many highly qualified atmospheric scientists highly skeptical, this is a dead issue. Claiming the "science is settled" and that there is "consensus" doesn't make it so. It's not and there isn't and that's why resistance on this issue is so strong.

        It doesn't help that the earth hasn't warmed in 17 years and that computer models have been wildly wrong for the last 25 years.

        Just ignore facts and follow your religious ideology or perhaps challenge yourself by actually looking at some data...

        http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/climatic-phenomena-pages/extreme-weather-page/

        May 7, 2014 at 10:16 pm |
      • Mark

        Um yeah, only bagger scientists fail to accept global warming. How about reading the data and the consensus agreements that show clearly that this is a cyclical process. Stop believing what your political party tells you to believe and use your mind for once.

        May 7, 2014 at 10:22 pm |
      • t

        No, MaryBrown. The burden of proof lies in those that are making the most pollution. The earth was doing pretty darn well prior to the Industrial era, and all these changes started happening when our output got to disturbing levels.

        May 7, 2014 at 11:27 pm |
      • Ryan

        World actually isn't round, my friend. It's elliptical. Circular, but bulging at the middle and flat at the top. 😉

        May 7, 2014 at 11:36 pm |
      • MaryBrownIsALiar

        Mary, warming hasn't stopped. The last decade was the hottest on record and saying it hasn't warmed in 17 years is either ignorance or blatant dishonesty.

        http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling-january-2007-to-january-2008.htm

        May 8, 2014 at 12:40 am |
    • Maaron

      You are a foolish person. Blogs, Really?!
      Scientific journals are peer reviewed and you will not find any debate on climate change.

      May 8, 2014 at 12:04 am | Reply
    • Max

      H2O actually as 3 phases, like almost all materials on earth, the three stages are solid (ice) liquid (water) and gaseous (water vapor or Steam) so I guess all the detractors to someone saying H20 was a gas were actually the ones showing their own Idiocy. The fact is global warming is actually happening and you can deny it all you want. I hope personally you deniers are the ones living on the coasts of the USA because at some point your opinion will no longer be heard. You will be treading water eventually. Good luck Idiots. For those who want to argue the 3 states, why don't you read this first, then take the foot out of your mouth.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_matter

      May 8, 2014 at 1:03 am | Reply
      • snowdog50

        "The fact is global warming is actually happening and you can deny it all you want. I hope personally you deniers are the ones living on the coasts of the USA because at some point your opinion will no longer be heard. You will be treading water eventually. Good luck Idiots. For those who want to argue the 3 states, why don't you read this first, then take the foot out of your mouth."

        Al Gore went from a net worth of 1.7 million while vice president to 200 million pushing global warming.... for a guy so concerned about rising oceans, that is a nice beach house he bought on the California coast

        May 8, 2014 at 2:06 pm |
  21. floydhowardjr

    Alert!!! Alert!!! Alert!!! From Democrat Headquarters: All democrats and supporters here and abroad, we must flood the media with hysterical global warming alarms to take the heat off Dem candidates in the November 2014 and 2016 elections due to the train wreck of Obamacare! Shout, scream, cry, make outlandish claims and don't stop till after the elections!!! Alert!!! Alert!!! Alert!!!

    May 7, 2014 at 9:15 pm | Reply
    • Maaron

      Your stupidity boarders on immorality.
      White man, you might just have to step up to the plate, take some responsibility for the world you created and try to make amends.
      The only thing coming out of your mouth should be recompense and apology.

      May 8, 2014 at 12:15 am | Reply
      • floydhowardjr

        So you hate my white skin racist? Must be a liberal progressive!

        June 13, 2014 at 12:05 am |
    • Nik

      Why is this type of comment even allowed? It provides no valuable addition to the discussion and instead encourages flame wars.

      May 8, 2014 at 3:32 am | Reply
    • floydhowardjr is a troglodyte

      How constructive of you. Regardless of whether this has anything to do with politics, to brush it off as a non-issue in the name of the same type of political smokescreening is hypocritical and reckless. You're the type of voter that tanks this country's reputation around the world.

      May 8, 2014 at 8:01 am | Reply
    • Which part

      Specifically, which part of Obamacare (that's not ALREADY in Romneycare), don't you like?

      May 8, 2014 at 9:17 am | Reply
    • Cedar Rapids

      oh im sure you lot could counter that by bringing up multiple benghazi panels.....oh wait, you have.

      May 8, 2014 at 11:42 am | Reply
  22. Jake

    The problem is purely economic. Climate change is happening and will continue to happen at an increasing rate until economic circumstances allow for alternative energy sources which are cheaper than fossil fuels. Also, why do the reporters make it seem like scientists have some sort of underlying agenda...a scientist who does bad/false science is hurting their own reputation in a field where your reputation is all you have. Their is nothing to gain by making a study go one way or another (unless the study is funded by an interest group)

    May 7, 2014 at 9:12 pm | Reply
    • Ryan

      You said it yourself, my friend. Economics.

      Money talks, especially in this day-and-age. That holds true even in the scientific and medial communities, unfortunately.

      May 7, 2014 at 11:38 pm | Reply
  23. mabean4

    I have so much more respect for Bill Nye going on a talk show like this and trying to educate people. I really feel for him having to listen to these knuckleheads. Good work Bill, and thank you.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:09 pm | Reply
  24. M Siterlet

    don't you just love it when the idiots connected to media use statistics with no verification – 64% do not believe global warming is scare tactic ??? wtF

    May 7, 2014 at 9:09 pm | Reply
  25. Sha G Law

    So sad. This is a most unintelligent society and its lack of understanding of the difference between fact and opinion and how science works in our daily lives will ultimately be its undoing. The stubborn inability of this country and other countries like it to set aside the desire for profit for the sake of having the ability to continue to exist on planet Earth is a stunning example of depravity to say the least.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:55 pm | Reply
  26. Halle

    Why are these videos so cut off? I want to see the rest! Seems suspicious.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:50 pm | Reply
  27. beancrisp

    FACT: Human activity does not cause or affect climate change.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:49 pm | Reply
    • John Bows

      Probably a good idea to re-label your comment as "UNINFORMED OPINION". If you want to, you can file it under 'BULLSHIT VIEWPOINTS, 5/7/2014" for easy accessibility.

      May 7, 2014 at 11:18 pm | Reply
    • jackcrackerman

      So is the Earth also flat in your imaginary world?

      Fact: Conventional combustion engines in cars put out Co2 emissions. Fact: The planet Venus has an atmosphere made up of Co2. Fact: Venus is not close enough to the Sun to warrant the temperatures it has unless you account for the "run away green house effect". Sure, the Earth has a natural heating and cooling schedule, but we are rapidly increasing this effect. Also, when Co2 is absorbed by the oceans the result is a higher PH level in the water... you keep increasing the PH and you'll end up making the ocean toxic.

      May 7, 2014 at 11:50 pm | Reply
    • scrivenrules

      Hypothosis

      May 8, 2014 at 12:46 am | Reply
    • Nik

      FACT: Facts require data and verifiable evidence in order to be be considered a truthful.
      FACT: Thousands of scientific studies from all over the world overwhelmingly show that global warming is happening at an ever increasing rate.

      May 8, 2014 at 3:34 am | Reply
  28. Robert

    The real problem is talking heads like S.E. Cupp and this Slow Loris guy. People need to listen to scientists, not talk show hosts, when it comes to science like climate change.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:42 pm | Reply
  29. derekream

    I can't stand it when these anchors cut off people who try to answer their questions...seriously, they could close their mouths for 1-2 minutes and listen, they may actually learn something new from someone who has much more knowledge on this topic than they ever hope to have.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:09 pm | Reply
    • Nik

      You are completely right, these kind of shows teach people that you can argue your point simply by shouting your opinion louder then the other guy while saying nothing of any value.

      May 8, 2014 at 3:35 am | Reply
  30. Monica Wilson

    Would have been Nice if media let him speak.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:07 pm | Reply
  31. bkolar

    It's ridiculous to say that scientists are trying to use scare tactics or bully people. The facts are scary, not the tactics. If waning the public about climate change sounds like fear mongering it's because climate change is bad news and we have to do something about. The public not believing in climate change doesn't mean "scare tactics" failed, it means they're too stupid or stubborn to acknowledge it.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:07 pm | Reply
    • TeamBillNye

      EXACTLY!! .. Right on point!

      May 8, 2014 at 12:43 am | Reply
  32. wretchedogre

    That BS crossfire quiz is misleading. There are about 50 Million cows in the U.S at any point in time which DO in fact produce more greenhouse gas than 25 million automobiles, however there are 250 million automobiles in the U.S that produce 10 times the amount of greenhouse gas that all the cows in the country produce. Way to warp truth to fit your idiotic right wing rhetoric Cupp.

    May 7, 2014 at 8:05 pm | Reply
  33. Kid

    I really like how ya'll just wouldn't let Bill finish his argument. That is so professional. I mean really. Let the guy make his point. Ya'll just talk over him and its rude, would you talk to your grandmother that way?Hurricanes really? Let's focus on something that isn't limited a small part of the year. Like Drought. Improper water usage, how much water is wasted daily. Let's talk about being preventive instead of reactive. So what if not all the data says agrees that climate change is in fact happening( its happening guys get use to it) lets prepare for it. Hurricane Sandy? Hurricane Katrina? remember those? Instead of building levies to withstand level three hurricanes, lets build them to withstand five. Control city growth so we have more land to grow food and not endanger our aquifers, SO WE STILL HAVE WATER. Cutting down on things like asphalt and concrete when able so water can drain naturally as possible into the water cycle.

    May 7, 2014 at 7:57 pm | Reply
  34. The mike

    Bill Nye is right.

    May 7, 2014 at 7:50 pm | Reply
  35. thebarak

    People just don't want to hear the facts. Nye knows the truth.

    May 7, 2014 at 7:35 pm | Reply
    • Me

      He is a phoney nye was never a scientist

      May 9, 2014 at 8:52 am | Reply
  36. Nicole

    I don't think S.E.Cupp realizes saying "I'm not a denier" is a disclaimer. Much like "I'm not a racist......but". People use these disclaimers to cover their asses and Nye saw right through it, as he should.

    May 7, 2014 at 7:33 pm | Reply
  37. J.M.

    I wish S.E. Cupp was as smart as she is attractive!

    May 7, 2014 at 7:19 pm | Reply
  38. Cat Springer

    "They are Man’s," said the Spirit, looking down upon them. "And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased."

    - Charles Dickens, A Christmas Carol

    May 7, 2014 at 7:12 pm | Reply
  39. John Bows

    So Nick Loris thinks that there's been no change in the temperature. I've heard this argument before. It's the sacred dogma of the climate denial camp, spouted routine on FOX News and repeated ad nauseum by popular denial bloggers like from Anthony Watt at "watts Up With That" and Marc Morano at "Climate Depot". I know and know EXACTLY why they (and Loris) hold(s) that position, and I'll tell you why right now.

    Imagine, just for a second, the graph of the price of a stock. Market prices move up and down, and while in general we'll see little fallings and risings in the price of the security. Now, let's say we take an average of those prices. Maybe a 50-day moving average. If the trend is valid, then as you see the moving average going up you'll more often than not notice that the price will swing around that moving average – it'll go above it and below it or land right on it – but the values tend to track the average and, if they get far enough away they tend to revert back to the mean (the why gets a little complicated, having to do with the convergence of sequences, but the theory of mean-reversion is important). One thing is not always, but tends to be overwhelmingly true: the larger the deviation of a data point from the mean, the more unlikely it is to see such a data point That is what climate denial experts, Nick Loris included, are banking on!

    Take a look at any robust data set of temperature readings (NASA, Hadley Center, U. Alabama at Huntsville), and you will see that in the last 40 years of climate data, the largest individual spike in temperature was in 1998. If there was any that you'd want to pick a data point to deny the existence of global warming then it would be in 1998. Why? Because you can claim that global warming isn't a good model and is a predictive failure because the global surface-air temperature hasn't been as high as it was – at least not for very long – since 1998. That's the essence of his argument

    It's a lot like picking the highest stock value of Apple Computers back in 2013 and saying that Apple Computers hasn't increased in value. Hmmm...it hasn't increased in value since 2013? That's odd, because it has If you look back at trend developments for the stock you'll find that Apple lived up to them quite well. If you look on longer trends, you'll see that Apple has been behaving normally for an appreciating security that experienced a major deviation to the upside and then corrected (as one would expect, because that's what happens statistically, as explained by the phenomenon of mean-reversion).

    Loris is cherry-picking the data. He's selecting the largest outlier from a data set and using it to attack the credibility of global warming because there should be a rise in temperature every single year and clearly there hasn't been since 1998 and so the global warming model doesn't work. That's like someone who is an Apple skeptic selecting the highest stock price of the company after a runaway jump in the price and saying that because it hasn't recovered or exceeded its highest former price that the company is failing and the Apple trend is not legit.

    Don't buy it for a second.

    A better, more thorough explanation of what I just said, go to the website below (and slap a climate denier in the face with it when they tell you there's been no warming since 1998):
    http://tamino.wordpress.com/2014/01/30/global-temperature-the-post-1998-surprise/

    May 7, 2014 at 7:12 pm | Reply
  40. Flkh

    Shouldn't we at least error on the side of caution? When did people stop believing in facts? This is scary, and I am concerned for our future.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:58 pm | Reply
  41. Hank

    "I'm not a denier, I'm just a moron" – Nick Loris

    May 7, 2014 at 6:57 pm | Reply
  42. Mary Moran

    Bill Nye is 100% correct. It's sad big money keeps putting out the "the climate has always changed" propaganda to avoid
    regulations and cut into their profits.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:45 pm | Reply
    • Mary Brown

      Bill Nye is 100% correct ? And I suppose you have read the actual science yourself?

      Start here with some actual real data...It's just not very scary.
      http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/climatic-phenomena-pages/extreme-weather-page/

      May 7, 2014 at 10:01 pm | Reply
      • Cristen

        Mary– I think skepticism is one of the most important tools we have. I did look into the site you posted, but it doesn't seem to be a particularly carefully reviewed source and the graphs look to be a bit cherry picked. I don't think many things in life are 100%, but the argument for anthropogenic climate change is a strong one (Vostok ice core data, among many many other data sets). The VAST majority of scientific papers in the last several years can't serve by themselves as sole support, but the knowledge they have given us is undeniable and the scientists that do not "believe" in climate change are certainly in the minority. Not that the majority hasn't ever been wrong before, but with knowledge gathered based on empirical scientific methods, largely self correcting, it does seem like it would be off not to change our current methods and make some big changes in how we live on our planet and what we're ok with giving up to do it. I personally ( and this is just my opinion) put much more stock in the words of scientists who don't have anything to gain but to help us all get the world back on track over people who are fighting it because it would mean they would have to be mildly inconvenienced, admit a scary truth, or whose pockets wouldn't be as fat. Who has more to gain by denying it? The amount of data in support of anthropogenic climate change by and large trumps the data that falsifies it. In a study of your own, would you look at the overall data and make an inference based on ALL of the data, or based on the outliers that made up a small percent? It would pull the mean, but not by much.

        May 8, 2014 at 12:00 am |
      • Maaron

        Blogs.....I love it! How about comic books? Or Facebook even?!
        I can't tell if you are trying to point out the stupidity of climate change opponents or if you really are an idiot. Either way, just keep posting!

        May 8, 2014 at 12:29 am |
      • MaryBrownIsALiar

        Here's a website that refutes 176 myths that deniers use. One hundred and seventy six!

        http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

        May 8, 2014 at 12:43 am |
  43. Woodwind

    Climate change is NOT our number one priority right now. Nor should it be. We have much more urgent and immediate issues to address. The economy, crime, wars, etc. Most of us acknowledge that the climate has been warming since the end of the last glaciation of the current Ice Age. If past is prologue, it will continue to warm for a while longer until the next glaciation starts. We should not be alarmed by 400 ppm CO2. In the Silurian Era 444 million years ago, atmospheric CO2 was 4,000 ppm, 10 times higher than today, but the mile thick glaciers still marched South, down to the banks of the Ohio river.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:41 pm | Reply
    • Trevor

      Hahaha pointing to a time period when multicellular organisms were mainly early vascular plants and ancestors of insects literally is a counterpoint. The planet's atmospheric composition does change. Yes, increasing levels of greenhouse gases is a natural occurrence, and biotic life can adapt (if given millions of years).

      For one, humans could not survive in the Silurian. If you were to travel back in time to that period, you'd step out of your time pod and literally die. There were no endothermic lifeforms alive in this period. Unless you have the respiratory system of a large sea-scorpion, you wouldn't stand a chance.

      Second, the rate at which greenhouse gases are being released into the atmosphere is significantly higher than any other time period that supported endothermic lifeforms. Notice I'm not specifically saying CO2 emissions, there are other pollutants that play an important role. Hydrofluorcarbons are shown to have an EXTREME impact on global warming. Look it up. You don't need a degree in chemistry to figure it out.

      Anyways, I know someones going to send me a link to some cherry-picked data about how global temps are actually decreasing. Whatever. No matter what data you send me about global temps there is no denying the fact the pH of the ocean is dropping. The world oceans are a carbon sink. That means CO2 is absorbed by ocean water. This leads to the acidification. You might think that the decrease in pH is a lot, but I assure you, it's enough to dissolve anything made of calcium carbonate. The shells of mollusks and I don't know... the coral reefs are made of CaCO3.... Oh and a lot of the plankton as well... hmmmm.... Wanna know what the world looks like when those things are gone? A lot like the result of the end of the Permian. You take one thing out of the food chain, you destroy the food chain.

      May 8, 2014 at 1:49 am | Reply
    • Nik

      Ah 444 million years ago, you must be referring to the Ordovician-Silurian extinction, a period when over 90% of ALL SPECIES on earth died. THAT 440 million years ago?

      May 8, 2014 at 3:39 am | Reply
    • Maaron

      Fool, think about what you saying?! Your stupidity is offensive. The earth will survive climate change: We will not. That is point!

      May 8, 2014 at 5:37 am | Reply
  44. Julia

    Man those people are there everyday, talk nonsense all day long and when they get a guest on the show who specializes on the topic, they interrupt him and aggravate the audience. I just wanted to hear what Bill had to say, i clicked on this link to see what he had to say, not to see him be shut up by these morons.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:34 pm | Reply
  45. bikeamtn

    A sobering reality – To be a naysayer in such crisis is liken to one holding up the sign that reads; “I’m ignorant, stupid and enjoy sticking my head in the sand so follow me.” You can thank the many leaders of the 'people' (strike that, add 'commerce') for the situation (to be passed on to our children) like; President Reagan’s dismantling of the Solar Energy Program launched by President Carter that harmfully setback Green Technology in favor of fossil fuel market subsidies (1981).

    Some say Climate Cange it just about money to be made; yes, much about money – and China is also a big problem as it had replicated US industrial progress since US manufacturing pushed jobs offshore over issues of healthcare, salary/benefits and higher profits (and the bonus of tax-free offshore accounts – currently totaling nearly 2 Trillion)

    Yes; the powerful bought their way into meddling with America’s ingredients to suit themselves and when the recipe failed the public (and our children) are left as the big loser. Human society has been led astray by greedy powers for the sole purpose of commercial gain with disregard for planetary sustainability and we and our children are its trained consumer assets to perpetuate the Sell and the Buy. This (now out of control) activity is like a cancer on our planetary ‘organism’ as the human ‘foot-print’ of our activity in industrialization, waste and pollution are quickly becoming no longer sustainable for our earth and why the recent studies in that regard. Independently (and by coincidence), I recently made a personal milestone on an old theme (‘There’s only one planet humans can call home’) but the great reveal was in identifying the connecting social/political mechanisms that result in a dysfunctional society.

    Wouldn’t cost the public much different just change in conscience and choices – The public’s eyes have been opened and things are going to change, for the public get’s it that the old business model is ‘out’ for a better more efficient, green world and have began lessening consumer consumption and waste, holding on to goods longer and rewarding companies with smart greener products and services and the new jobs for this will be there to make this green shift happen. The problem is the old business model tycoons not only, not wish to change but have refuse to release control over the markets by resorting to political sabotage, blocking any real progress in a green direction out of the greed for money (the ‘keystone pipeline’; only token permanent jobs and the oil goes to China, not exactly a strengthening of Americas energy independence and the list goes on) all this to better the interest of the powerful and not of the peoples.

    A New Business model: Originality – Seeing the Future; Good business means good products that help people and Eco-Friendly. Consumers exercise their power from overreaching conglomerates by rewarding businesses practicing good business models, buying their goods & services ensuring the success of good companies to grow bringing more jobs. Good products have longer life cycles, can be handed down or have built-in recycle plan (reducing the junk). That’s the cycle of good business and good progress.

    Why the priority: well; how are we at Risk Management? The recored, I’ll cite a recent two – the Katrina/Louisiana Disaster (nearly 2,000 deaths); BP-Gulf Oil Spill. Certainly, a ‘Catastrophic Failure in Risk Management’.

    Climate Change is of global concern and shouldn’t be a partisan issue, there is an International team of science in agreement here and this one, we can’t get wrong.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:30 pm | Reply
  46. Mike

    The most absurd thing I have seen in a while. 3 talking heads against 1 gentleman of science. They made themselves look like idiots. It was supposed to be a hatchet job and it backfired. Good job Mr Nye. I doubt I could have kept my cool in the face of that much lunacy.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:24 pm | Reply
  47. dan

    I find it funny that most of the people that believe in globing warming don't do anything to help stop it. They just sit back with a Bud Light (that causes global warming when the make it) and hope something changes.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:22 pm | Reply
    • johnirwin1908

      Ridiculous claim. How the h do you know what people are doing or not????

      May 8, 2014 at 8:41 am | Reply
  48. vitz

    cnn has nothing to do w/news, and everything to do w/ viewer market share. like all of the other 'infotainment' stations, from fox to msnbc etc etc. merely 'bread and circuses' for the idjit masses...

    May 7, 2014 at 6:18 pm | Reply
  49. ProtectAmericanJobs

    Let's get real America – The American People need leaders who will stop selling us out to countries like Communist China, India and Mexico.

    It's called polarizing and distracting – I guess gay marriage and abortion aren't cutting it anymore – So now it's climate change.

    What about Communist China's Extreme Pollution Issues, Climate Change and Unfair Trade

    We should bring manufacturing back to the USA where we're less likely to pollute than they are in China, India and Mexico and at the same time provide a much needed boost to the Real American Economy and the American People.

    Foreign Lobbyists here in the US promote sending US jobs to countries like Communist China, India and Mexico where they work for slave wages, no benefits, no OSHA safety standards or No Real Environment Regulations. It also doesn't help us compete when many of these Chinese company's factories are subsidized by China's communist government.

    Just check out the current Chinese extreme pollution issues – We all live in the same world, but not every country plays by the same rules.

    We're not the bad guys right now. Countries like our USA, Germany, Canada, Japan and other countries like them are trying to do the right thing to help limit and clean up pollution. But countries like China, India, Mexico and many others are not doing the same. You Don't see China, India or Mexico with anything even close to our EPA, DEP, OSHA, etc........ – Do you?

    Trade with countries like Communist China, India and Mexico is pretty much a One-Way-Street. – And how's that been working out for the American People, the Real American Economy and the Health of Our Planet?

    Our economic problems didn't happen overnight. It's been happening over the past 25 years, but the American economy was kept going by middle class American consumers tapping into the equity on their homes to enable them to continue to buy the cheap outsourced products until they were completely tapped out, out of good jobs and or out of work.

    On the US Department of Commerce's US Census Bureau website there's a graphic showing how our trade imbalance has gotten progressively worse over the entire period from 1989 to the present and how it's really accelerated at an increasingly greater rate each year since 1999.

    Just go to the site and check it yourself: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0004.html

    www(dot)census(dot)gov(slash)foreign-trade(slash)balance(slash)c0004(dot)html

    We can thank "our leaders" from both sides and the WTO for that.

    If these "free trade" agreements were so good us, why did our trade deficit keep getting increasingly larger and larger during this span of time.

    Increasingly way more money going out of our country every year versus coming in every year.

    It's Not Rocket Science.

    Regardless of what the Free-Traitors keep trying to sell us, we can see what's real. The American People need to just trust their own instincts, common sense and what they've seen actually going on all around them versus all of the nonsense that the Free-Traitors are still trying to sell us.

    Also most counterfeit goods are produced and manufactured in Communist China, making it the counterfeit capital of the world. In fact, the counterfeiting industry accounts for 8% of China's GDP.

    Trade with countries like Communist China, India and Mexico is pretty much a One-Way-Street.

    We can bring manufacturing back to the USA where we're less likely to pollute than they are in China, India and Mexico and at the same time provide a much needed boost to the Real American Economy and the American People.

    The bottom line is that "Our Government" has to protect domestic industry and the jobs that those industries provide. If they do that, the rest will take care of itself.

    Bringing manufacturing back to the US not only gives jobs to the US citizens who would be working in those manufacturing facilities, but to the people that would be working in the businesses that would spring up all around them. This should also include the safe harvesting, production and distribution of our own natural energy here in the USA, rather than paying for fuel from countries where they hate us. Let's keep that money and those jobs here in the US.

    Nowadays it's obviously not about being either lazy or uneducated as many try to profess, but about wages, expenses and regulations that are not even remotely close to the wages, expenses and regulations in our country.

    If more people would have listened to Ross Perot back in 1992, America wouldn't be in this mess.

    The “Global Market Place” is not a level playing field! The whole idea of the tariffs is so we can pay our factory workers a decent wage and not be blown out by these other countries where they don’t play by the same rules.

    The bottom line is that “Our Government” has to protect domestic industry and the jobs that those industries provide. If they do that, the rest will take care of itself.

    We may have to pay a bit more for products made here in the USA by US citizens, but at least we'll still have jobs and a future for our children.

    We should bring manufacturing back to the USA where we're less likely to pollute than they are in China, India and Mexico and at the same time provide a much needed boost to the Real American Economy and the American People.

    Unfortunately both sides are still able to get most people to buy and drink their flavor of Kool-Aid, only it's just different flavors of the same brand and both flavors are making the American People and the Real American Economy sick.

    Wake the heck up America!

    May 7, 2014 at 6:13 pm | Reply
    • lizzzzeth

      Do please take all of your crappy industries from our country. They pollute our waters and natural resources, they underpay workers who will take any job thanks to our corrupt goverment, and they will leave us with all the garbage the United States doesn´t want. México gets nothing but trouble out of your industries.

      May 8, 2014 at 8:52 am | Reply
      • ProtectAmericanJobs

        That's plain stupid – The people with all of the excuses as to why we can’t, shouldn't or aren’t willing to manufacture products here in the US are the same people who have provided us with the very same shortsighted thinking that’s gotten us into this mess in the first place.

        Like I said:

        If we want to make it better – We should bring manufacturing back to the USA where we're less likely to pollute than they are in China, India and Mexico and at the same time provide a much needed boost to the Real American Economy and the American People.

        May 8, 2014 at 5:15 pm |
  50. dr johnny

    bill nye the gay guy..what a hack..hahahahha oh noooo we re gonnna dieeeee in a thousand yearsssssss
    hahahahahhaha

    May 7, 2014 at 6:10 pm | Reply
  51. Mark

    Lets look at it like this. We, as in the people of the world, for the past hundreds of years have built a business and economic system that has not taken in account its flaws. Sure coal and oil is needed to fuel energy needs and economic growth, but businesses and governments have been reluctant to accept the fact these energy sources impact our environment. Now that everyone is aware (or maybe your not if you live under a rock) lets see governments and businesses take initiative and put forth corporate profits and tax payers money to cleaning up the after effects. Hell there has been worse things tax payer money used for. Or if my starbux coffee went up another .25 to help stabilize the world climate issues so be it. Something needs to happen, you can't argue with science. Experiments have been done, you may disagree with it, but you can't argue its false.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:09 pm | Reply
  52. Dontbelivemyeyes

    Wow, this really opened my eyes on how bad things are in usa, when hard data and sciense is denied in media, i cant even belive those jerks/idiots are tv hosts, talking about how green capitalism will save us... haha we are most certainly doomed

    May 7, 2014 at 6:07 pm | Reply
  53. Harry

    The lady thinks she'll look smarter with glasses on, but she looks and sound pretty stupid, especially trying to talk over Bill Nye the science guy. What about shut up and listen. That's what I'm trying to do. That other guy just sounds like an idiot.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:07 pm | Reply
  54. David

    The only thing the news (rather it be cnn or fox or any of the others) seem to ever cover is things like nonstop crashed plane story or that politician did us all sorry, and of course there always has to be the one murder case that is covered everyday till we all puke. I see very little in the way of real news being reported, Things like the wars all over the world or the epidemics or truth on climate change. From what i saw Bill did not ever really get to explain from his point of view and the hard facts, I still think he wins simply because i have been going outside for 40 years and listen to and learn from my elders and i don't need science to tell me it is changing. The facts throughout earths history is that temps and co2 go hand in hand. Needless to say (or so one would think) If we pump co2 into the air the temp rises. arguing over what computer models predict is stupid, don't need a computer model to see that things are rapidly changing. In the past decade Records of all kinds all over the world have not just been broken but in some cases shattered. Record heat, cold, floods, blizzards, hurricanes, tornadoes......you name it! I don't understand how the media can find so much crap to talk about but never get to the truth about the important things. But fear not, we will always no what the rich and famous are doing and we will always hear the lies of the government and political scandals and oh yes, lets not forget how good the media is about filling their hours and days and weeks with news about a plane that there is no news about to this day, other than the fact that it is gone. Come on already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    May 7, 2014 at 6:05 pm | Reply
  55. Patrick

    Every show that Bill Nye goes on, the hosts seem to bully him mercilessly and never let him get his point across. If I were him I would not go on any show that had a forum type of format but rather one that allotted both sides to speak, uninterrupted in ten minute intervals. Otherwise just allow the climate deniers to go on believing what they do and let them keep quoting their own 3% of scientists who believe as they do to the fools who watch their drivel. We on the other hand can get on with fixing what we can in this world and maybe saving their sorry #$%^'S.

    May 7, 2014 at 6:02 pm | Reply
  56. paul

    #1. You ask an expert to discuss a topic and decide to just chime in with your pitiful "cliff notes" or facts from some sound byte you listened to before he showed up. The problem here is that you have NO RESPECT for SCIENCE and no respect for the guest in question.

    Change in hurricane patterns is not sufficient evidence to completely dismiss climate change and just coming up with one point to argue against it just detracts from the big picture.

    #2 Denying the facts seem to not only be a problem with our media (unless they use it during sweeps or to get ratings) but a problem with a majority of Americans. Politicians certainly are more to blame because they have the power to commit resources and create laws that protect our planets survival.. Pretending a problem does not exist doesn't make the problem go away. I guess you are all waiting until the ground opens up under your house or the water reaches your doorstep or you have to eat other humans to stay alive. What will it take to really convince you that we have done harm to our planet before it is to late? Why even have children anymore if you are just going to drain the planet and leave it to them?

    This is pathetic and we as a people are at fault. LAZY STUPID ARROGANT

    This is the biggest problem facing our survival as a race on the planet – IDIOTS!!!!!!!

    REMEDY:

    Anyone that is not pro planet earth should not be elected in any position to prevent the survival of the planet – Period

    Listen to the EXPERTS who have studied the cause and affects and stop listening to pundits and the media

    Do your own research and stand behind the people and scientists that care and are trying to fix the planet.

    Forget about your new freaking I-Pod or tablet or big screen TV, Fancy stupid car and your money because it isn't going to save you when there is no air to breath or fish to eat.

    Do you want your children to play on a green lawn, see a blue sky, swim in the ocean, climb a tree?

    Don't ignore this issue because it will all be GONE.

    Why do we always have to wait until it is too late?

    May 7, 2014 at 5:58 pm | Reply
  57. gail59

    You don't have to be a scientist or a politician to see the writing on the wall. We are experiencing droughts, floods, earthquakes, mudslides, tornadoes, hurricanes at a higher intensity than before. I have been through many of these experiences over the past 20 years and agree that things are changing at a faster more intense rate. Quit bringing politics into this and just acknowledge the fact that global warming has been happening for many many years. Our way of life is unsustainable and we all need to make changes on a personal, group, political, industrial level and quit worrying about profit for the few on top. Jeez, wake up and smell reality.....it's not pretty.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:55 pm | Reply
    • javabeans

      On the contrary. I have lived through and witnessed climate conditions as bad and worse than what we are currently experiencing. There is no writing on the wall except that climate always changes. Human beings are poor predictors of the future ( except for weather coming in the next 24 hours) showing an historical record of long term events of about 50/50. There sure is a lot of whining and the worst kind of future fear mongering going on.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:33 pm | Reply
    • Brad

      Unfortunately the numbers do not back up your claim that these events have increased. Do you have an aversion to facts?

      May 7, 2014 at 7:01 pm | Reply
      • Maaron

        Climate change is a fact. Facts are true. Denying the truth is lying. You,sir, are a liar.

        May 8, 2014 at 5:44 am |
    • Robx

      These same socialist were pushing Global COOLING in the 80s. Last winter was actually "one of the coldest on record". It's funny how the facts change to meet the needs of the ones pushing the agenda.

      May 7, 2014 at 7:10 pm | Reply
    • beancrisp

      Before when?

      May 7, 2014 at 8:50 pm | Reply
    • Mary Brown

      I'm a meteorologist and I completely disagree with Bill Nye on this issue. There has been no increase in extreme weather. He talks about science but ignores the facts.

      I'm not alone. Many of my fellow scientists are sick of this hype and alarm-ism. Climate change is real but humans have only added about 1 deg and 2" of sea level. It's just not very scary.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:08 pm | Reply
      • Maaron

        No way you are scientist. You are such a fibber! Anyone can print off a certificate, but a scientist it makes you not.
        If you really were a scientist, then you would understand rigor and professional ethics. Now, ask god to forgive for lying to everyone and go back to your housecleaning and scrapbooking. So silly!

        May 8, 2014 at 5:53 am |
      • frunobulax718

        Climate over the past 10,000 years has been remarkably stable; varying only by 1 degree C most of the time.

        In the past century, the temperature has gone up by 0.8 degrees C, and is expected to rise another 6 by 2100.

        That is not a good situation.

        May 8, 2014 at 12:04 pm |
    • moreofthislessofthat

      Wrong. Many of those things are lessening not worsening in intensity and frequency. Your twenty year guestimate is so effing ridiculous considering the earth has been here for 3 billion years. It's like watching a person for 4/10ths of a second and saying they seemed to be blinking their eyes alot more. Just stupid. So stop. Provide real empirical data or stfu.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:16 pm | Reply
      • Mary Brown

        Here is some data on extremes...
        http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/climatic-phenomena-pages/extreme-weather-page/

        May 7, 2014 at 10:02 pm |
      • Mary Brown

        Although I provided some data, the burden of proof is not on the skeptical scientists like myself. The burden of proof is on those making the claims of pending catastrophe. You must prove to me that there has been an increase in extreme weather or a significant rise in sea level or catastrophic loss of ice. Then the burden is on you to prove that the changes are harmful. Then the burden is on you to demonstrate what cost effective changes can be made which will alleviate the problems.

        So far, none of these burdens have been met in my eyes. Others disagree with me. The "court of science" has not handed down a unanimous guilty verdict. Not even close. Those telling you that it has are counting on you to be ignorant and blind.

        May 7, 2014 at 10:28 pm |
    • moreofthislessofthat

      "We are experiencing droughts, floods, earthquakes, mudslides, tornadoes, hurricanes at a higher intensity than before. " WRONG. The evidence shows the opposite is true. "You don't have to be a scientist or a politician to see the writing on the wall." No you don't need to be anything to see facts that don't exist. That is not a skill, that is retardation.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:29 pm | Reply
      • Bob Hasfleas

        You're right (and Bill Nye is wrong) about increased cyclone activity, but the IPCC says that there is a > 66% chance that we've seen increases in drought and heavy rainfall events due to human activity.

        May 8, 2014 at 4:45 am |
      • gail59

        Whoa! I don't recall calling anyone retarded. State your opinion! No need to be insulting and rude....hey! do you work for CNN? Ha! You must be living under a rock to not notice all the climate changes. Maybe you were born yesterday...maybe you're just in denial....maybe your just rude and uneducated. Whatever the reason. I feel sorry for people like you because you are the ones who will suffer the most when all is said and done.

        May 8, 2014 at 10:03 am |
      • moreofthislessofthat

        You cannot "witness climate change" dummy. A weather event is not climate change.

        May 9, 2014 at 11:24 pm |
  58. Tyler M

    These guys talk when they should listen.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:47 pm | Reply
    • John

      They only get paid to talk, and that chick should be fired for what she is saying...

      May 7, 2014 at 6:44 pm | Reply
  59. sandiegowatch

    We have a pollution problem....NOT....a climate change problem.

    Show me the proof.

    Water levels have changes by 400 ft......BEFORE the industrial revolution.

    Here are some more facts:
    1. Water levels have been much higher and much lower based on geological evidence.
    2. CO2 levels have been much higher and much lower based on ice core samples.
    3. Egypt used to get rain often.
    .....all before the industrial revolution.

    etc...etc...

    May 7, 2014 at 5:45 pm | Reply
    • David

      But each and every one of those changes you talk about happened over thousands of years not all within one century.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:07 pm | Reply
    • Mark

      sure everything you stated is true, but it happened over the course of millions of years. Not over the course of the past 500. Do research, examine the evidence the scientific community has offered and reevaluate your opinion. That is all.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:11 pm | Reply
    • JP

      You can't be that dense

      May 7, 2014 at 6:25 pm | Reply
    • frunobulax718

      "...all before the industrial revolution."

      WAY before the Industrial Revolution.

      When glaciers covered the Earth's surface, the seas were lower. When there were no year-round polar ice caps - which last happened some 2.58 million years ago (and could happen again as soon as 2016) - the seas were much higher.

      However, ice core samples only go back 700,000 years or so, and they all indicate CO2 levels far below the 400 PPM we are now experiencing. If you go back a billion years, OTOH, the Earth experienced as much as 7,000 PPM; but that was a period in time where the Earth was completely different.

      The Sahara was greener prior to the 5.9 Kiloyear Event, which made it the desert it is now.

      All of these timescales are way beyond that of the two centuries of the Industrial Age.

      The problem today is not that the climate is changing, but rather that the climate is changing at an unprecedented rate. All of the above events took place over the course of millennia, if not hundreds of millennia. This one is coming at us over the course of a few decades.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:33 pm | Reply
    • Flkh

      You refuse to look at facts..that is the problem.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:53 pm | Reply
    • Rob

      Not much of a post. Tell us about what yrs. you're talking and how many people inhabited the planet then.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:55 pm | Reply
    • Gwendolyn

      It is true that the planet does go through cycles of warmer, colder, more carbon dioxide, less carbon dioxide etc. However, after many calculations, it is theorized that the rising carbon dioxide levels due to the burning of fossil fuels and other things. Here is a graph of that correlation. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQU1igop-dYaIEsdfmcaET4B6g3xxqJ5NTurBIxK0UbaNZDIeOR

      The big issue here is that everyone needs to realize that small change in global temperatures make a HUGE difference. It is predicted that if the overall average temperature of the planets rises only a mere two degrees Celsius, nearly half of the Earth's species will become extinct. That's thousands upon thousands of species gone forever, which is why it is important to reduce and watch what gases we emit to the atmosphere.

      May 7, 2014 at 7:34 pm | Reply
    • Alex

      by just saying "pre-industrial revolution", you don't really limit what time period you're talking about. 20 years before the industrial revolution? 100? 1,000,000? You go back in time far enough, sure, all those statements are true and every climate scientist would agree with you. If you're talking about only shortly before the pre-industrial revolution, please post your sources so we can tell you exactly how wrong you are.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:21 pm | Reply
    • Super Sandwich

      hey sandy watch. Those are valid criticisms and criticism is critical to proper science. Keep in mind though that Climate can be affected without machines. It is a little known fact that trees generate rainfall as well as protect soil from erosion. A great example is a Native tribe in the American southwest that deforested all their land subsequently ruined their ecology and society. I gave away my book about it or I would tell you the name. It is in the book Collapse by Jared Diamond.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:36 pm | Reply
    • Aaron S.

      Hi. I'm a high-schooler who has taken Environmental Science and other classes that thoroughly explain the Climate Change problem, and since it is my future that is going to be the most affected, I feel a need to attempt to convince you that the climate change problem is real.

      Since the Industrial Revolution, mankind has been pumping enormous quantities of heat-trapping gases, like carbon dioxide and methane, that are slowly but surely causing the average temperature of the planet to increase. If you take a look at this graph – http://climate.nasa.gov/system/content_pages/main_images/co2Graph11-cropped.jpg – you can see that the current levels of CO2 have never been achieved in the past half million years. This increase in greenhouse gases has caused the temperature to rise around 0.8 degrees Celsius, or 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit, a substantial increase, considering the difference between the average temperature now and that of the last Ice Age was a mere nine degrees. Considering this, it is blatant that the emissions that man is putting into the atmosphere are having a seriously adverse impact on the planet's climate, with dire consequences in store if we don't do anything about it.

      If you need more information about the negative effects of climate change, take a look at these sources:
      http://climate.nasa.gov/index
      [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIUN5ziSfNc&w=640&h=360]
      http://www.hulu.com/watch/392828

      Please vote in favor of climate change policy – the future of our country is at stake.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:44 pm | Reply
      • frunobulax718

        Its not just future of our country my young friend; its the existence of our species that is in danger.

        May 8, 2014 at 12:13 pm |
    • A. Thought

      it doesn't just have to do with the industrial revolution, my poor man. as you stated, shit has been changing forever, and shits changing right now. that will effect us.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:06 pm | Reply
    • michaelflyger

      Unfortunately those particular "facts" you mention - out of context - are not what climate change / global warming is about. Climate change (under discussion here) is about increases in atmospheric carbon and the resulting increase in temperature - globally. It can and will indeed be possible for the *weather* in a specific spot on the planet to be cold or hot. On average, however, global temperatures will continue to trend higher. Atmospheric carbon has increased due to emissions from human technology.

      For human history (pre-industrial revolution) carbon emissions have not been anywhere like they are over the last few decades. Nearly 300 million years ago atmospheric carbon was insanely high because of huge amounts of Siberian coal burning in volcanic regions. We *know* why carbon emissions rise - and that it is a very bad thing. Currently the primary cause of this is humans. 300 million years ago it was volcanos and huge deposits of dead trees.

      There is nothing we know about actual climate science that paints a different picture.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:40 pm | Reply
    • aaronap

      Oh wow, if only the entire scientific community knew what you knew we could've avoided all this conflict! Thank you for sharing your wisdom, we better pack up and go home.

      May 7, 2014 at 11:23 pm | Reply
  60. Rogan - Department of IT

    Not understanding Science is not an argument against it.
    Being offended and loud doesn't make you right.
    Ignoring the facts doesn't make you right.
    Ignorance is one thing, but some of you choose to be down right stupid. Lets bring back common sense.
    This
    That was the most horrible "debate" I've seen in a while, bringing someone in, not letting him talk, that back and forth, if anything you guys bullied him.
    Just horrible.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:39 pm | Reply
    • Joe

      This is the best comment I have ever read.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:33 pm | Reply
  61. David Fagan

    Is S.E. Cupp auditioning for a spot on Fox News? Her demeanor (brash, talking over guests, argumentative – which is different from analytical btw – generally a bully) qualifies her for a Fox News position just on the 'I'm louder than you' aspect alone. CNN is NOT doing itself – or a public which comes to CNN for 'news' and 'analysis' – any favors in having such a shrill voice. Have a conservative voice, sure, but make sure that person is willing to engage and not attack. S.E. Cupp, if you classify your vocation as that of a reporter, you need to check your methodology.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:32 pm | Reply
    • Colleen

      This is who CNN has debating science....In 2000, Cupp graduated from Cornell University with a Bachelor of Arts in Art History. In 2010, she earned a Master of Arts from the Gallatin School of Individualized Study at New York University with a concentration in Religious Studies.
      Where are the scientists?

      May 7, 2014 at 7:10 pm | Reply
    • Will

      She seems to love wearing those glasses to seem more intellectual. Very artificial.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:01 pm | Reply
      • Abdullah Oblondata

        She stole the idea of the glasses from Palin.

        May 8, 2014 at 8:21 am |
  62. Keith8404

    Thank you for reminding me once again why I don't watch CNN or any of the other cable "news" networks. As long as you continue to encourage or even allow shouting matches instead of serious structured debate. I and many, many like me, will continue to shun you as the societal parasites that you have become. For broadcast information and analysis of current events I will continue to turn to sources like NPR and BBC, who generally know how to conduct themsleves like adults in a civilized society.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:32 pm | Reply
    • Ann

      I agree with you 100%. That was not a debate it was an ambush. Even if I didn't already agree with Bill the ignorance and hostility the opposition showed without providing any real opposing facts would make me believe whatever he is saying. We as a species are the only ones who can have any hope of saving earth to bad ignorance can scream louder.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:42 pm | Reply
    • Nathan Lee Bush

      Agreed. That was cringe worthy. The hosts are more entertainers than thinkers. That woman wouldn't last five minutes in a college level classroom, so what the hell is she doing moderating a nationally televised debate?

      And this is the classic mistake of putting two "sides" of an argument up as though they are equally valid. Human caused climate change is about as established as the theory that the earth is round, i.e. fact. Why would they bring in a Economist from the f-ing Heritage Foundation to weigh in on a scientific fact? The only ones objecting to this are oil funded science deniers and they are influencing the public debate just like cigarette companies did for decades when it became clear that cigarettes were killing us. God, sometimes it's embarrassing to be American when this is what passes for news.

      May 7, 2014 at 7:13 pm | Reply
    • Mary Brown

      Turn off the news and read some science. You'll find no increase in hurricanes, no increase in droughts, no increase in tornadoes, etc. The increase in extremes exists only in the computer models. Temperatures are now flat for the last 17 years. Total sea level rise attributable to humans is at most 2 inches. Taking away every car in America might lower temps by 0.05 deg in half a century.

      The science is out there, but Bill Nye is ignoring it. As a meteorologist, I am appalled and at some point, my entire science will be discredited. 20 years from now, when the temperature is 0.1 deg warmer and sea level is an inch higher perhaps we will realize how silly we were to worry about this hype. The next time, when there is a real problem, we will be ignored because we will have no credibility.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:16 pm | Reply
      • Tommy

        Ms. Brown,
        You claim to be a meteorologist. I find that hard to believe since you clearly have no understanding of simple charts let alone sophisticated statistical modelling. Temperatures SPIKED 17 years ago and have been lower BUT TRENDING UP since. This 17 year snapshot of the average global temperature is much too narrow to be predictive in the sense that you (or the nitwits at whatsupwiththat) imply. Try looking at ALL the data instead of cherry picking a 17 year period that serves your preconceived notions. As for evidence – go to NASA's website and take a look at satellite pictures of Greenland for the past 20 years. Greenland used to be mostly white. It's now mostly green. Next year, for the first time in possibly 10000 years, there may be no summer ice in the Arctic Ocean. You should stop getting your lead from folks like Sarah Palin.

        May 8, 2014 at 1:55 am |
    • Dave

      Agreed. However, Al Jazeera (America) is relatively decent, especially for covering a lot of stories that fly under the radar of most other news outlets.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:47 pm | Reply
  63. realist

    It's so embarrassing and maddening to watch this video. Our kids and Grandkids lives are on the line and these people are finding every way possible to avoid, confuse and minimize this problem. They don't even let the scientist speak, which is symbolic of the way we're not listening to the scientists. The facts are clear; we have never seen this rapid a rise in global temperatures before and the effects are happening NOW – not just in models. It's shameful that these hosts won't even let the guest finish a sentence so people can even consider this information seriously. The facts are inconvenient to the corporate owned media and the pundits. But all the scientists who are not paid by industry are clear about this looming issue. While this drama plays out, the window for mitigating this and saving our kids a world of trouble is closing. Disgusting.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:31 pm | Reply
    • Flkh

      Exactly!

      May 7, 2014 at 6:55 pm | Reply
    • Brad

      "All" the scientists. Do you also have an aversion to facts? Give me empirical data that shows these things happening at a faster rate than in the past. Otherwise, you should begin to think for yourself.

      May 7, 2014 at 7:04 pm | Reply
  64. lafonda

    I agree with Bill Nye

    May 7, 2014 at 5:30 pm | Reply
  65. Doctor

    Fine none of you have to believe. None of you and when this world is beyond saving and the scientists say its to late, you'll wish you listened.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:26 pm | Reply
    • concerned agnostic.

      No they will blame Obama.

      May 7, 2014 at 7:00 pm | Reply
  66. george

    CNN=Fox News, rightwing BS.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:25 pm | Reply
    • modernbardblog

      Before you accuse Conservatives and hang us on the Cross, you and your Socio-Liberal fellows should take a look at your President. He can't even manage the country's money, he bankrupted us twice. It's no surprise to me that any man who can't do basic math wouldn't listen to a scientist when he tells him something important, no more than it doesn't surprise me to see you blame Conservatives for all your life's problems just because you want a government full of free handouts and ignorant stooges. Way to go there, buddy.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:25 pm | Reply
      • frunobulax718

        I seem to recall a Republican was president when we were last bankrupted.

        May 8, 2014 at 12:17 pm |
  67. Jimmy

    Did the people at FOX take over CNN?

    May 7, 2014 at 5:16 pm | Reply
  68. Disgusted by CNN "Debaters"

    This isn't a debate. Debaters don't cut off someone trying to make a point. S.E. Cupp and Nick Loris shouldn't be allowed to debate anyone. And how about that projection, calling Mr. Nye the bully when S.E. Cupp can't stop screaming at him?

    What good comes of denying climate change? The amount of evidence that supports the idea of global warming DWARFS that of what doesn't. The hotter, longer summers, crazy tornadoes and hurricanes, the ice caps melting aren't enough for you people? You're gonna pay attention to the one or two reports that deny it when climate change is happening all around you? You are the reason why humanity will be its own demise. Shame on you for shaming the people who are here to warn you.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:15 pm | Reply
  69. Who Cares Its Only Humans

    What's really at stake? Humans.
    Like the planet couldn't live without them. Oh that's right it has only lived with them for 200k years now.

    That's a drop in the bucket in the 4 billion years of the planet.

    They really weren't moving forward anymore.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:15 pm | Reply
    • Nathan Lee Bush

      Well, untold thousands of species of plants and animals we're killing off in the process as we massively reengineer the carbon levels in the atmosphere and the acidity levels of the ocean. it's now an scientifically accepted fact that we're in the sixth great extinction event in the history of life on earth, this time caused by us (but who's counting?).

      May 8, 2014 at 2:19 am | Reply
  70. Mark Tillman

    This is nonsense. This show should be taken off the air once again for its partisan hackary. They have a stage to walk through the evidence and analyze it from an unbiased view point (or you know... 'news') and instead they make this garbage. CNN should dump this. CNN should apologize to Bill Nye for wasting his time with a group of morons. CNN should apologize to its viewers for wasting their time.

    May 7, 2014 at 5:08 pm | Reply
    • gail59

      The only good thing about the show was the fact that it actually made them look incredibly stupid and Bill Nye even more convincing.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:10 pm | Reply
    • Sam S.

      I agree wholeheartedly on that.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:17 pm | Reply
  71. Kader

    How about you: 1) Don't ask to bring in a guy to discuss something, and not let him talk. 2) Gang up on him for a topic YOU asked for him to discuss, to the point where he can't discuss his viewpoints.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:58 pm | Reply
    • george

      you got it right!!

      May 7, 2014 at 5:17 pm | Reply
    • alext5

      I think cupp is a loud mouthed old lady that needs to listen more than talk because she has massive hole for a mouth and nick loris?? who are you? You are just as bad as her. If you are going to ask someone a question then let them answer it not try to butt in and prove your point. She did not ask you the question? Now when he sub questions to her question then yes answer but come one you two are idiots and need to let a scientist tell you whats being proved and whats not. Science rules over you hurricane shmurricane words.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:55 pm | Reply
    • Me objective

      No kidding, it's starting to sound like the Bill Maher show....

      May 7, 2014 at 9:36 pm | Reply
  72. ivan

    so you have three a-holes who have no idea what there talking about and are just reading of what someone else wrote for them, debating with a man who was doing research way before they even touch collage...... and bullying are serious if you dont know what the F**k your talking about and the one who knows the most is correcting you that is not bullying. bullying is bill getting out of his chair and telling them to shut the f**k up and llsten....... this show has a bad host like whos dick did she suck to get that job. smfh!!

    May 7, 2014 at 4:57 pm | Reply
    • Dude

      Bill comes on and gets about 3 sentences fully. Before they start trying to tear him into shreds that wasn't a debate that was 3 Fools trying to look good for a camera. I wish they would have shut they mouths and opened there ears to what the man was trying to say. It would have been nice to have at least 2 other " Science Guys" As they so put it to help out Bill on this debate he was out numbered by Jackasses.

      May 7, 2014 at 5:12 pm | Reply
    • dylan

      hahaha right on point my man!!

      May 7, 2014 at 5:22 pm | Reply
  73. Josh

    Not understanding Science is not an argument against it.
    Being offended and loud doesn't make you right.
    Ignoring the facts doesn't make you right.
    Ignorance is one thing, but some of you choose to be down right stupid. Lets bring back common sense.

    If you are going to invite some one to hold a debate then you should give them time to talk and make their point. The only bullies here where crossfire. Scientists are not bulling people into accepting the truth media networks and people like you make it sound like the science community is bullying people but it is far from the truth. Stop your lies, stop your hate, stop the stupidity, stop misleading people and most of all stop contributing to the downfall of man kind.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:55 pm | Reply
  74. Kevin

    Global warming does indeed exist. There's many people in denial because they depise science and the truth because they don't want to be wrong.

    Theres proof that Global Warming exists
    Scientists from all over the world believe and explained how it exists.

    Where's the proof where it doesn't exist?
    The whole "government taking my money" argument is vague and idotic with nothing to back it up.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:54 pm | Reply
    • Brad

      What proof are you referring to, and please be specific. Perhaps the fact that temperatures have not risen in almost two decades. Is that the kind of proof your talking about?

      May 7, 2014 at 7:06 pm | Reply
  75. Henry

    Looks to me like your standard case of inviting someone on your show just to never let him actually speak, or make a point. American media is awful.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:52 pm | Reply
  76. jasonpotvin

    there is a difference between opinion and fact. opinions change. facts do not. I feel this is all based mainly on opinion and to argue an opinion or statistical analysis of what people's opinions are and to base that as fact is the only incorrect way to look at this. I will take the scientist over the political debates any moment. At least with facts I can see their relatedness to reality. Opinions are like assholes; everyone has one.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:51 pm | Reply
  77. Alex Krotz

    Hi everyone,
    Climate change is a huge issue for me as well. MIT has competition called Climate Colab where people submit proposals for ideas to help mitigate climate change, check it out! I have two proposals i am working on currently, one is to use smartphones as a platform for social change, http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300210/planId/1305319 the other is on Molecular imprinting technology as a means to filter greenhouse gasses (it is far from complete) http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300204/planId/1305323 the final proposals will be selected and there will also be a popular vote, I could really use like minded support so please take a look and if you like them make a quick account and hit the support button or make a comment. Thank You

    May 7, 2014 at 4:50 pm | Reply
  78. Josh

    Dear CNN and all main stream media that likes to call themselves "news".
    Your narrow minded views, hate speeches, and opinionated bull shit are leading people into darkness. Get your facts straight. keep your egos out of these debates and stop trying to distract from the issues with bullshit "facts". You are whats wrong with the world today fix it.

    Climate change is real people. How in the hell could 85% of the scientific community be wrong and these dumb shit politicians and "news" reporters be right? Pull your heads out of your ass. Even if climate change wasn't a real thing how could it hurt us to look fore and use cleaner fuels and power generation? We need to get rid of coal and oil use because it is killing us not the planet the planet will survive we will be long dead before earth dies especially at the rate we are going.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:42 pm | Reply
    • gail59

      Thank you for saying what everybody is thinking. What Poll are they talking about in the beginning? Who did they poll?
      Themselves??? This mainstream "news" (crap) seems to be the only thing out there. What a shame.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:28 pm | Reply
    • Brad

      So a consensus makes something right? Is that your proof? There is absolutely NO empirical data that shows that man has impacted the earth's climate. If so, where is it?

      May 7, 2014 at 7:08 pm | Reply
  79. JoeTorre

    It is absolutely absurd to see people continually fighting and denying this as if there's something about it that's up for debate. It's about survival, plain and simple. There's no conspiracy, no hoax, no liberal agenda, just the fact that we're destroying the atmosphere, making worse living conditions for ourselves and future offspring and doing nothing about it but making excuses. I can't believe that so many still say this isn't actually happening.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:39 pm | Reply
    • george

      You just nailed it!

      May 7, 2014 at 5:32 pm | Reply
  80. John

    I can't believe that reporters on a generally left wing news station would act like this, let alone plug it in the news. If scientists have agreed that human interaction is having an effect on the planet, then the medias effort to stifle this could potentially end the reign of the great naked ape. It shows in this video that the efforts to discredit global warming have worked on over half the American people. The fear alone of letting bill nye finish a sentence should be proof enough that it is a deceptive and pernicious game CNN is playing

    May 7, 2014 at 4:32 pm | Reply
    • Steve

      NO ONE who watches CNN for even a short time could say they are left wing. They are just wingless and hopeless.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:30 pm | Reply
  81. garry

    Humanity is marching towards extinction and all cnn can do is call the people trying to warn us bullys. Maybe we deserve our fate.

    May 7, 2014 at 4:12 pm | Reply
  82. Interested Third Party

    Dear CNN:

    How about you show us the entire segment, instead of two clips. It would probably benefit both sides of this argument if we had more than two snippets of a larger picture.

    Thanks,

    Interested Third Party

    May 7, 2014 at 3:30 pm | Reply
    • Supporting Science

      That was my first thought. Just another way to silence the Science Guy.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:53 pm | Reply
  83. G SMITH

    GLOBAL WARMING DOES NOT EXIST. This is a Democratic Hoax to get your money. Any person with a little Common Sense knows this. Do not be fooled by the Cult known as the Democratic Party.

    May 7, 2014 at 3:27 pm | Reply
    • Joe

      I would like you to know that 97% of all GLOBAL(other countries besides the U.S. have scientists) climatologists are in unanimous agreement that climate change is happening and that we are a huge factor in the rate it is happening.

      How the F do you think the left convinced that many Asian, European and other global scientists to support this evidence? Holy Crap they are brilliant!!

      May 7, 2014 at 4:08 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        The amusing part is that he claims that the Democracy Party has the influence to coerce 97% of the world`s scientists but can`t even get a bill passed in a Republican-controlled House.

        May 7, 2014 at 4:45 pm |
      • Brad

        Where is the empirical data that proves this, Joe? Do you believe that a consensus equals true scientific discovery. Sad.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:10 pm |
    • Dustin

      Brainwashed idiot. Using the scientific method we can conclude that climate change is happening much faster because of humans than it would on its own. The earth hasn't seen this level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since the GREAT DYING. MORON

      May 7, 2014 at 4:26 pm | Reply
      • Brad

        Really, where do you find this supposed data? And try to be specific.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:10 pm |
      • Bob Hasfleas

        Here's some specific data for Brad:
        The latest IPCC report, worked on by hundreds of climate scientists: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/

        In particular, check out this figure of global temperature: http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_FigSPM-1.jpg
        This one shows the rising sea levels: http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_FigSPM-3.jpg
        This one shows the radiative forcing (basically, how much extra heat they keep in) from various sources: http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_FigSPM-5.jpg
        And this one shows the concentration of CO2 and ocean pH: http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_FigSPM-4.jpg

        Of course, there's a lot more detail and context in the full report.

        May 8, 2014 at 5:16 am |
    • Phill Lamson

      Spoken like a true ignorant Republican....

      May 7, 2014 at 4:40 pm | Reply
    • concerned agnostic.

      And I should believe you because you are a climatologist? You have an advanced degree in science? Please do tell.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:41 pm | Reply
      • russell

        When Exxon Mobil, Shell, BP and every other oil company admits that they are causing climate change, its pretty clear that it exists. When the perpetrators can be mature enough to accept the facts, you should be able to do the same.

        May 7, 2014 at 5:32 pm |
      • FoolsExperiment

        How many climatologists would you like to say this to you? Because between Nov 2012 and Dec 2013, 2258 papers by 9136 scientists (globally) place humans as an important cause of global climate change. 1 (yes, ONE) disagreed.

        Scientists do not disagree about this. It is settled science. Stop trotting out the token talking heads who will spout off on their unsubstantiated (based in scientifically validated evidence) opinions and move on already to finding solutions.

        To clarify one point in the video. We are very confident that these extreme weather events are associated with global climate change. What we're still uncertain about is how to PREDICT FUTURE EVENTS. We suck at modeling these things with any precision into the future. But as for what has happened in the past, the evidence is overwhelming.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:56 pm |
      • concerned agnostic.

        My comment was directed at G Smith. I believe whole heartedly in Climate Change/Global Warming.

        May 7, 2014 at 10:17 pm |
    • David

      I don't Understand how anyone could say there is no global warming. You don't even need a scientist to tell you, just go outside from time to time. Yes there have been warmer and cooler periods in earths history but there is no sign that it ever changed so rapidly unless something catastrophic happened. Where i live we broke record highs yesterday, it was 100+, the record that it beat was all the way back in 2012. For those who refuse to believe that we humans are screwing up the planet you are just in a ridiculous state of denial, ignorance and or stupidity.

      May 7, 2014 at 5:37 pm | Reply
    • BitchPlease

      It is really too bad that not just ignorant fools like you will suffer the effects of man-made climate change, what irks me most is that you and your blind-eyed, deaf-eared, Bible-thumping friends are in the majority and divert, subvert, sidetrack and in general get in the way of positive change that will make the world a better place. It is BAFFLING and FRIGHTENING that people like you have a right to vote.God help us all.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:16 pm | Reply
    • Well let's see

      Should I believe a whole bunch of actual scientists? Or should I believe a Palin voter that's drinking Everclear from a Mason jar on the "lean to" of his 1970s trailer? Hmmmmmmm.

      May 7, 2014 at 9:31 pm | Reply
  84. Copernica7

    you get so mad when he interrupts you, then you interrupt every single thing he says. And he's the one that's bullying here?

    May 7, 2014 at 3:20 pm | Reply
  85. Dan

    The folks on crossfire are the people that couldn't handle high school science class. The lady on the show is one of of those fast talking, "I'm right cause I raise my voice" people. She counters a science argument with percentages of people who believe the science. Where does that come from? The flat earth society? Who cares what some percent of the people believe? The other guy counters with "some experts think", ignoring the huge prevalence of scientists on the other side. The woman thinks its science's responsibly to advise the politicians on how to change the public's perception. She doesn't really, but that's one of her raised voice points. At the same time, no one is supposed to say anything that might "scare" the public. Its a case of Bill Nye being ganged up on by the bone heads. Some day people will look back on this just like they do the arguments about the earth orbiting the sun and being round. Back when some percentage of people thought the stars were holes in a big black blanket and got scared at any other thought.

    May 7, 2014 at 3:06 pm | Reply
    • yessica

      AMEN!!!

      May 7, 2014 at 4:31 pm | Reply
    • Paul

      I love you for even mentioning the Flat Earth Society. Sadly, the Flat Earth Society actually has some pretty good arguments for the flat Earth model, compared to the arguments and models of people denying the problem of climate change.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:45 pm | Reply
      • Brad

        The flat earthers are what people today would call liberals.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:12 pm |
    • Todd G.

      I continue to return to Neil Tyson's comment that the difference between science and religion is that science works even if you don't believe in it.

      May 8, 2014 at 4:29 pm | Reply
      • Rob

        uh, so does God and religion. Try again.

        May 8, 2014 at 5:09 pm |
  86. Grim Fandango

    Those three were never willing to debate. They just decided to talk so loud and continuously that the person they invited does not get a chance to get a word in. That is not how you get informed, that is not how you inform others, and that is not how you debate a topic. That is how you stay ignorant.

    May 7, 2014 at 3:06 pm | Reply
    • Josh

      I couldn't agree more people like the hosts of crossfire are a plague on humanity. They tell people what to fear and for no other reason than they don't understand or like it. People like them need to be removed from the public spotlight.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:48 pm | Reply
  87. Sumtingwong

    I love it when these conservatives like se cupp use polls to bolster arguments thinking the public knows best. Lets just establish this fact right now. Americas are DUMB. Most dont have college degrees, passports and couldn't locate ukraine or iraq on a world map yet of curse want to wage costly wars there LOL Americans rank pitifully behind other nations in education so their general concept of the world and science is rather narrow. I dont believe or follow any poll that asks something of the American population as their intelligence is questionable. So who would i rather trust...SCIENTISTS who are "bullying" us or a bunch of mental vegetables that made Duck Dynasty and Kardashians popular?

    May 7, 2014 at 3:00 pm | Reply
    • c0lt

      I'm from America, and I agree with this completely.
      When the people decide to get their heads out of their A$$es and start doing research for themselves, rather than letting others do it for them while they waste their brains away watching reality TV, then maybe things will change for the better.
      I'm sure if they took polls as to those who agree and disagree, on a yearly basis, and checked those polls against average IQs per year, there would probably be a correlation.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:21 pm | Reply
    • Ryan

      Ouch. That seems a little harsh and unnecessary, but you do bring up valid points. Thing is, though, every nation has their ignorant populations. Every single one of them, including the one where you come from. The United States of America is the third most populous nation on the Earth, only behind China and India... neither of which have as interconnected populations as the United States. So, of course it's going to seem as if most of the people you stumble upon on the internet are going to be American. Duh. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of commentators of any site will most likely have little-to-no knowledge of the subject at-hand, and are merely voicing their own opinions on the matter (which, if they are from the United States, they have every constitutional right to do so.) and are rarely to be considered credible.

      In case you are wondering, I am actually from the United States. I am 20 years of age, currently a student at Louisiana State University, and I highly despise any sort of 'reality television show' like 'Duck Dynasty.' I graduated from a prestigious private high school institution with honors, and I was too young to have formed an opinion regarding the Iraq War... to be honest, I might have even opposed it if I was at my current age back in 2003. The fact is, though, we probably won't ever know the truth as to why the United States pursued an invasion of Iraq. The CIA, NSA, and the Pentagon know so much more than we'll probably ever know, and I can guarantee you that they knew the answer to the question of whether Iraq held WMD's LONG before President George Bush approached Congress to ask for support of an invasion of Iraq. CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc. are hardly 'news organizations' anymore than YouTube is an 'entertainment provider.' Money talks, and that reflects in typical American media. If you want to discern the truth through US media outlets, the best way to do it is by using multiple media outlets in order to weed out each source's bias. Fox News is equally as reputable of a news source as CNN, NBC, ABC, and CBS are... it just happens to be conservative whereas all the other television networks are progressive, so of course it'll appear to be the odd one out.

      The United States is such a diverse nation, with so many different ecological regions and cultures... there's really no need for citizens to travel outside of the nation, and it's obviously going to be remarkably cheaper to simply travel within the nation rather than abroad. Europeans most likely don't have to worry about a transatlantic flight to get to Paris if they wanted to, yet those in the Americas probably do. Fact is, the Americas are geographically isolated from the rest of the world.

      As to your claim regarding the education system in the United States, each state sets standards for it's individual school systems. There is very little that the federal government can do regarding the education system. All 50 states are collectively trying to raise the bar, but the issue is in funding these reforms. The United States is over $17 trillion in debt. The middle class is practically being pushed into non-existence as wealth inequality in the United States continues to grow at a staggering rate. There is nothing that the Republican party nor the Democratic party has or will most likely propose that will change this, as both parties are essentially the same... and both parties platform consists of one thing and one thing only: to make their sponsors as wealthy as possible.

      May 8, 2014 at 12:14 am | Reply
  88. Abdullah Oblondata

    I watched the video a second time and I just want to make a couple more points. Nick Loris would have you believe he read the latest IPCC report. I am quite sure he did not based on the way he portrays it's finding. Instead, he read someone else's summary of the findings and he then takes bits and pieces of it to try to attack Bill Nye's position on the overall consensus. He even goes as far as saying, not all scientist agree with the consensus. The ones that don't have been debunked more times that Carter has pills. Nick wouldn't get that reference.
    S. E. Cupp is really quite the bitch in this segment. She wants to talk about the polls and the scare tactics, and how the "Science Guy" wants to attempt to bully and shame Nick. Of course Nick's attempt to throw out some bullshit talking points that are wrong or taken out of context is a valid position in her world.
    Lastly, poor Van Jones doesn't really get to respond. I wonder if it has anything to do with...

    May 7, 2014 at 2:34 pm | Reply
    • Dan

      Shes graduated college in Art History. Now she's arguing climate change with the science guy.

      May 7, 2014 at 3:12 pm | Reply
  89. DRJJ

    Bill Nye is an actor guy, not a scientist FYI. If we wanted to reduce say vehicles emissions from our 250 million vehicles and leap frog a few years in emission reductions, we'd simple lower the Nation freeway limit to 60! It's instant, cheap, proven, fair, saves oil and lives-no brain or favoritism required either! Nye is angry because a prominent Christian recently proved macro evolution is a religion-taught to our kids in public schools as gospel!

    May 7, 2014 at 1:51 pm | Reply
    • Dan

      That thar prominent Christian science expert have a name, Jed?

      May 7, 2014 at 3:19 pm | Reply
    • DT

      Pretty sure having a Science degree makes him a science guy.

      May 7, 2014 at 3:26 pm | Reply
    • Nick

      Bill Nye has a bachelors degree in Mechanical Engineering from Cornell (one of the most well regarded institutions in the world), worked for Boeing for many years (developed one of the important pressure sensors in every 747 in the air today), and has countless hours of experience trying to understand different science phenomena. I can guarantee that he has a much better understanding of climate change then you do.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:15 pm | Reply
    • Joe

      Oh you are right, Bill Nye only has a Bachelors in Mechanical engineering! Oh, he also holds several patents, and somehow though completely unqualified was the vice president of the Planetary Association. Not to mention acting while spending 8 years teaching kids about physics, chemistry, biology and life.

      Bill knows more about the broad spectrum of science then 99% of the population.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:16 pm | Reply
    • SK

      FYI Bill Nye has a degree in mechanical engineering from Cornell University and went on to work on critical systems for Boeing jets. Acting doesn't make for stable aircraft, I don't care how much you want to pretend otherwise, and if you've ever flown inthe past 20 years, you've trusted your life to some of his work. Bill Nye isn't pissed because "macro evolution" was proven wrong. He's pissed because people would rather sit there and cling to popular belief to the detriment of life as we know it on this planet instead of allowing themselves to honestly examine the data that exists without political or religious biases. Take a class in thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, vector calculus, and about 100 credit hours of other science courses and then tell me how your acting career is going.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:39 pm | Reply
    • george

      Wrong!

      May 7, 2014 at 5:20 pm | Reply
    • concerned agnostic.

      I think you need to watch some "Bill Nye The Science Guy" shows. You may learn something.

      May 7, 2014 at 7:08 pm | Reply
  90. Ry Guy

    The best thing about science (or in this case, the worst) is that it is true whether you believe in it or not.

    May 7, 2014 at 12:57 pm | Reply
    • DRJJ

      Science is based on pre- suppositions that are based on assumptions FYI! You know what they say about assumptions!

      May 7, 2014 at 1:54 pm | Reply
      • J

        Science isn't refutable, it's fact. They use assumptions to get to a conclusion, then test that conclusion over and over to ensure the results are consistent and then it is accepted as scientific fact. Just because you don't believe science has the answers, doesn't mean you're not wrong (which you would be)

        May 7, 2014 at 3:29 pm |
      • kenstanek

        oh my god no. not really. science is based on assumptions that are tested, over and over and over again, and peer review, and doubt and criticism and overcoming all that doubt and criticism to achieve consensus. It's not just a whole bunch of guesses. It's a whole bunch of guesses, each of which are tirelessly tested – usually with the attempt to DISprove the theory.

        May 7, 2014 at 3:39 pm |
      • Lando

        You sure you aren't confusing yourself with the bible?

        May 7, 2014 at 4:44 pm |
      • F

        Science STARTS as a theory and then is tested over and over again trying to prove that theory wrong. That's the beauty of science, these people spend countless hours trying to prove their own theories wrong. Then it gets tested by others. If it is proven that that theory is in fact true then it becomes scientific FACT. I don't think, in fact I'm quite sure, that someone with Bill Nye's background and experience would just start throwing out random buzzwords. Bill Nye and hundreds, probably thousands, of scientists around the world have proven that this is a real issue.

        May 7, 2014 at 4:47 pm |
      • Kevin

        Science is based on questions(hypothesis) and theories are based on facts. Not all of Science is based on assumptions, we have expierments, technology and knowledge to help us predict and explain something. To say all science is based on assumptions is incredibly ignorant.

        May 7, 2014 at 4:48 pm |
  91. Well let's see

    Who are we going to trust? A bunch of actual scientists? Or a bunch of Palin voters that are drinking Everclear from Mason jars from the "lean to" on their trailer? Hmmmm.

    May 7, 2014 at 12:41 pm | Reply
    • G SMITH

      I trust Palin any day when it comes to the Democratic Party.

      May 7, 2014 at 3:29 pm | Reply
      • concerned agnostic.

        I'm sure you do.

        May 7, 2014 at 6:56 pm |
    • Bubba

      Who do I Trust? No one. I trust no one... no one is testing this problem without a opinion. There are lots of so called facts, that have been disproved, and still permeate the debate like they are still fact. Climate changes, that is the nature of climate. We cannot accept blame without a reason that can be proved without a shadow of a doubt. the fact that the only thing that will solve the global warming problem is the most terrible one, human deaths, if it is true that humans caused it, about 1/2 of the world population has to die. so how do we accomplish this goal? I'm all ears.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:01 pm | Reply
  92. Patrick

    I like how S.E. accuses Bill Nye of bullying and shaming others by bullying and shaming Bill Nye. I also enjoy hearing Nick say he's not a climate change denier and then in the same sentence denies the data about climate change occurring.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:42 am | Reply
  93. O'drama ya Mama

    All I know is Bill Nye owned everyone on Crossfire last night.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:25 am | Reply
  94. Tom1940

    A related article asks the question: "What can President Obama do about Climate Change?! I suggest: "Just shut the hell up!" Cap 'n Trade, Carbon Tax, etc., are nothing more than initiatives to fund government. Pure and simple just "revenue enhancement" measure, having nothing to do with Climate – but everything to do with funding Obama-Nomics, i.e. furthering the "Big Government Spending" and eliminating the Middle Class by nickel and diming them out of existence.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:13 am | Reply
  95. Minnie Mouse

    Climate change is not our most number one urgent priority. We can't control every"Mother Nature" event and everything people put into the air and into the grounds.

    We have all kinds of gun violence issues, poverty issues, mental health care issues, more skilled jobs that pay decent wages are needed, in general more jobs needed, the costs of education is sky high, immigration issues, all the people from flight 370 are still missing ect...... that exceeds over what's happening in our air around us, in the sky and in the ground.

    We can only do for what we can 100% control and the "Climate" is something no one can 100% ever control. Talk about it all you want but no one will ever be able to keep up with the continual changing of our "Climate", so do things that you know can be fixed to make a difference. It's a great subject but not the subject that needs to be our number one priority.

    May 7, 2014 at 9:01 am | Reply
    • Dan

      I agree. Climate change and what we are doing to the planet is a major issue,but there are other issues. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do the right thing. I'm not sure there really is a single number one issue.

      Arguing against climate change on the basis of percentages of public opinion is just idiotic. Its only logical to political pundits who make their living arguing and trying to make points with the public.

      May 7, 2014 at 3:26 pm | Reply
    • kenstanek

      you're lumping "the missing people from flight 370" in as a more important problem for THE WORLD than climate change? This is very bad argument.

      May 7, 2014 at 3:42 pm | Reply
    • Paul

      That argument is completely invalid by your own logic. You can't 100% completely control gun violence, education costs, poverty, mental health, skilled jobs, etc, either, so maybe we should not spend any effort on those. There are *so many* changes that need to happen on all of these issues, that looking at it as an "all or nothing" problem is completely, completely pointless. We need to make the changes that we can, while we can. Yes, we will probably never have 0 hurricanes or tornadoes. Yes, the Earth won't ever be at absolute 0. But, we can slow down the destruction of our planet, and that's a pretty damn good place to start.

      May 7, 2014 at 4:55 pm | Reply
    • Beedoo!

      So you think because there are other problems with the world, we shouldn't worry about this one? Let it be someone else's problem? Let other people worry about greenhouse gases and recycling, because I can only focus on this one thing over here! What a shallow mind you have.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:53 pm | Reply
  96. 2_indy1600

    The earth's axis shifts with each major quake; polar shift has begun; this has nothing to do with CO2; the earth's mantle and plates are shifting, making more volcanic action, sinkholes, etc. This is about a green energy tax. See a site with only posts by noaa, nasa, fema and legitimate agencies called divulgence dot net. Man-made climate change is not the culprit, the earth's MANTLE is changing.

    May 7, 2014 at 2:39 am | Reply
    • kenstanek

      How do you think we found out anything about the earth's mantle? Science. That's how. If you think the mantle is the bigger problem, you owe credit to science for teaching you about it. Now, if all those geologists hit the nail on the head with their theories so well, who's to say the rest of the scientists might not have some good points to listen to, too?

      May 7, 2014 at 3:44 pm | Reply
  97. WhatAJoke

    It's ridiculous that a man like Bill Nye has to debate these fools on climate change.

    Climate change is happening. It is an issue and it needs to be dealt with.
    The woman is more worried about scientists "attacking" the public. Its like saying the weatherman attacks me with the weather forecast. If an atom bomb was getting ready to hit near me, I'd hope I'd get "attacked" and given a freaking heads up.

    Hopefully she got enough pictures with celebrities on her Crossfire Instagram. What a professional

    May 6, 2014 at 11:50 pm | Reply
  98. David Bates

    Funny coincidence about 36% of Americans have a bachelors degree, and even less have higher degrees.

    May 6, 2014 at 11:27 pm | Reply
  99. willhaas

    There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate. There is none in the paleoclimate record. The climate change we have been experiencing today is consistent with what has been happening over the Holocene for the past 10,000 years and there is nothing we can do to change it. The primary greenhouse gas in the Earth's atmosphere is H2O and it provides ample negative feedbacks to the addition of CO2 so as to mitigate any effect CO2 might have on climate. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them.

    May 6, 2014 at 10:56 pm | Reply
    • chris

      I had a good laugh reading this. I feel sorry for the kids you will raise on false information.

      May 6, 2014 at 11:53 pm | Reply
      • willhaas

        Which false information are you talking about? There is science on both sides of this issue.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:26 pm |
    • Aaron

      "There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate."

      So much for reputable resources. What an outrageous and highly uneducated claim. You should probably start with not pulling out facts from your rear.

      May 7, 2014 at 2:18 am | Reply
      • george

        Bullshit!!!!

        May 7, 2014 at 5:23 pm |
      • Brad

        Where then is the empirical evidence?

        May 7, 2014 at 7:16 pm |
      • willhaas

        There is science on both sides of this question. Ok, where is the evidence?

        May 7, 2014 at 7:23 pm |
    • weatherbug

      To say CO2 has no climate change is the same as me whipping out my dick in public and stating its still in my pants.... ITS FUCKING REAL! Maybe when the pacific washes over your god damn house and the daily wind chill is a fucking twister you'll finally get the point? The methane gas from livestock is impacting our damn climate FFS, its time to wake up and smell the bullshit. Time for us to switch over to a fuel source other than fossil; use some of those +2000 patents the US has scooped up with eminent domain.

      Some people just need to have their faces dragged through the mud for the point to drive home aye? Tell you what, why don't you conduct your own dissertation backed up by dozen of environmental scientist NOT PAID by petro-dollar funds to come up with a uniform thesis on exactly how CO2 or methane gas DOES NOT effect our environment; oh wait, you can't? Because they do effect our damn environment? Well that's a damn shame.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:38 am | Reply
      • Hector Slagg

        Um, Well,
        So what ya worried about weatherbug. Doing anything to speak about to fix the weather will require all manufacturing to completely shut down. Oh golly, I think Obama has already fixed the weather. No jobs, no pollution, no nothing.

        May 7, 2014 at 11:14 am |
      • willhaas

        Profanity adds nothing to your argument. The primary greenhouse gas in our atmosphere is H2O and it provides ample negative feedbacks to the addition of CO2 so as to mitigate any effect that CO2 might have on climate. In the past CO2 levels have been more that 10 times what they are today and at those levels there were both warm periods and ice ages. The climate change we are experiencing today is consistent with climate change that has been taking place during the Holocene for the past 10,000 years. There is no real evidence that the CO2 we have been adding to the atmosphere is having any real effect on global climate.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:19 pm |
    • nigeltheoutlaw

      http://www . epa . gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.html
      http://www . rtcc . org/2013/12/12/carbon-dioxides-effect-on-global-warming-understimated/
      http://ocean . nationalgeographic .com/ocean/critical-issues-ocean-acidification/
      http://www. stanford . edu/~longcao/Caoetal2007GRL.pdf
      http://climate . nasa . gov/causes
      http://occri .net /climate-science/interactive-graphics-the-effects-of-elevated-co2

      Remove the spaces obviously. There is plenty of evidence that CO2 affects climate, contrary to your claim.

      May 7, 2014 at 8:59 am | Reply
      • weatherbug

        thank you for the sources nigel; people really need to read.

        May 7, 2014 at 12:21 pm |
      • Mark Tillman

        Thanks for this. Instead of CNN reporting news, they did this anti-science nonsense.

        May 7, 2014 at 5:11 pm |
      • willhaas

        There exist papers, articles, and books on both sides of this subject. You need to yorself make a case.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:07 pm |
      • Brad

        ALL speculation, lil nigel. You should begin to think for yourself at some point in your life.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:17 pm |
    • JOn
      May 7, 2014 at 2:39 pm | Reply
    • kenstanek

      Do you know that H2O is water?

      May 7, 2014 at 3:45 pm | Reply
      • Kevin

        Yes I did know H2O is water, what is the fucking point?

        May 7, 2014 at 4:44 pm |
    • aviva1964

      String words together that sound sciencey and ignore actual science. Nice try.

      May 7, 2014 at 5:17 pm | Reply
      • dennis reifsteck

        wow, where those hosts put on there to prove what idiots can be like when confronted with something that make them have to stop driving there SUV one block to the store, Who was shoving something down who's throat in this interview? Who's agenda was behind this whole farce? Who is standing behind this with the money forcing this charade? Shame on CNN, I really expected more from you.

        May 7, 2014 at 6:35 pm |
      • willhaas

        What I am telling you is based on actual science. The the theory is that because of CO2"s LWIR absorption bands, adding more CO2 to the atmosphere causes its radiant thermal insulation properties to increases which decreases radiant heat energy flow from the earth's surface to the upper atmosphere where Earth radiates to space in the absorption band LWIR. This insulation effect causes warming at the Earth's surface and lower atmosphere but cooling in the upper atmosphere. The warming at the Earth's surface and lower atmosphere causes more H2O to enter the atmosphere. H2O is the primary greenhouse gas with LWIR absorption bands so more H2O causes the radiant thermal insulation properties of the lower atmosphere to increase even more which represents a positive feedback. That is where some apparently stop with their analysis but that is not all what happens.

        H2O is a major coolant in the Earth's atmosphere moving heat from the Earth's surface to where clouds form via the heat ovaporizationon. More heat is moved by H2O via the heat of vaporization then by convection and LWIR absorption band radiation combined. More H2O in the atmosphere means that more heat gets moved which represents a negative feedback.

        Clouds not only reflect incoming solar radiation but they radiate much more efficiently to space in LWIR absorption bands then the clear atmosphere they replace. More H2O results in more clouds which represents another negative feedback.

        As the lower atmosphere warms, the upper atmosphere cools, That is how insulation works. The cooling in the upper atmosphere causes less H2O to appear which counteracts the increase in CO2 because H2O is also a greenhouse gas. This represents another negative feedback.

        The negative feedbacks work together to mitigate any effect that added CO2 might have on climate. Negative feedback systena are inherently stable The Earth's climate has been stable enough over tthe past 500 million years for life to evolve. We are here.

        There is evidence in the paleoclimate record that warming causes more CO2 to enter the atmosphere but there is no real evidence that additional additonal CO2 has any effect on climate. If changes in greenhouse gases are affecting the climate then by far the majoriety of that change must be caused by H2O. During the preindustrial Holocene, There have been warm periods with temperatures warmer than today amd cool periods with temperatures cooler than today but CO2 levels have been fairly constant. The climate change we are experiencing today is very similar to what has been going on during the Holocene for the past 10,000 years.

        May 7, 2014 at 7:00 pm |
    • concerned agnostic.

      Keep drinking the Kool Aid.

      May 7, 2014 at 6:58 pm | Reply
    • MB

      Wow Will, you wrote a mind boggling post. Will is the kind of REALLY STUPID person who is on the brain-dead side of the argument. He claims the water (H20) is a gas. And, not only is it a gas, but a greenhouse gas, that has the ability to counteract the impact of CO2. Hilarious stuff, dummy. He never even mention carbon monoxide. How to you get to be this dumb? American schools. Where in the hell was this idiot educated? I bet he failed any science class he ever attempted because, as he told his mommy, "it was just too hard". Here's a suggestion. Don't say anything about something that you know absolutely nothing about. It makes you look like a stupid idiot.

      May 7, 2014 at 7:35 pm | Reply
      • SAmT

        Amazing! This kid doesn't know that water can be a solid, liquid, or a gas! Look at what Facebook, YouTube and the Daily Show have done to our children!

        May 7, 2014 at 10:02 pm |
      • SAmT

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

        May 7, 2014 at 10:10 pm |
      • Mary Brown

        " He claims the water (H20) is a gas."

        That's easy. It often is.

        " And, not only is it a gas, but a greenhouse gas, that has the ability to counteract the impact of CO2."

        Yes. That's probably the biggest source of debate in the science right now you remarkably uninformed person. Everyone knows H2O is a greenhouse gas... but what feedbacks do they have in the modelling ?

        " Hilarious stuff, dummy. "

        Amazing comment, really, considering he's right and you are wrong about everything and it's simple fact.

        "He never even mention carbon monoxide. How to you get to be this dumb? "

        I'm not sure I've ever seen Carbon Monoxide mentioned in a scientific article on greenhouse gases.

        "Here's a suggestion. Don't say anything about something that you know absolutely nothing about. It makes you look like a stupid idiot."

        Hey, congrats. You finally got something right !

        May 7, 2014 at 10:52 pm |
      • willhaas

        Thank you MB for reading my post and commenting.. On the Earth H2O appears in three phases, solid, namely ice and snow, liquid, namely water, and gaseous, water vapor. The Earth's atmosphere is on average 2% H2O but only .04% CO2. It is water vapor that allows clouds to form and rain and snow to fall virtually all over the planet. What makes CO2 a greenhouse gas is its LWIR absorption bands. Water vapor also has LWIR absorption bands and because there is so much of it, H2O provides the majority of the greenhouse effect. This is all well known and not in dispute.

        CO is very toxic because of its affinity to bind with the hemoglobin in your blood and hence prevent the transfer of Oxygen to your cells. CO will also oxidize to CO2. There is so little CO in our atmosphere that any greenhouse gas properties it might have are insignificant.

        May 8, 2014 at 12:21 am |
    • Mary Brown

      I disagree somewhat with what willhaas is saying here but his comments here are supported by a significant group of atmospheric scientists...at least 10% of the field. He made a different comment about the feedbacks from CO2 and H2O. That comment hits at one the main debates within the science. Almost all of us agree that CO2 drives some warming. What we disagree on is the feedbacks. willhaas and many others as well as myself all contend that the feedbacks are negative and that the warming is partially or completely neutralized by the feedbacks and that the warming issue is therefore wildly overblown. The alarmists, on the other hand, have no actual idea what the real-world feedbacks are so they make up numbers to feed their computer models and they can generate whatever answer they wish. I'm not kidding. It's that primitive. After 25 years, the models have over-stated the warming by a factor of about three. This is strong evidence that the true feedbacks are negative as willhaas has stated.

      I'll be glad to explain all this to my grandchildren with pride some day ... about how a group of brave atmospheric scientists refused to sell their souls for funding and orthodoxy and demanded actual data. And how this group, against the politically correct call to "save the earth", instead saved the humans from a wave of crazy, illogical earth worshiping religious zealots.

      May 7, 2014 at 10:43 pm | Reply
  100. ProtectAmericanJobs

    If we want to make it better – We should bring manufacturing back to the USA where we're less likely to pollute than they are in China, India and Mexico and at the same time provide a much needed boost to the Real American Economy and the American People.

    Just check out the current Chinese extreme pollution issues – We all live on the same planet, but not every country plays by the same rules.

    May 6, 2014 at 10:29 pm | Reply
    • Okay

      The Chinese have been taking more and more steps to fix their pollution issues, in the past few years too. Even they realize that the status quo is not sustainable.

      May 7, 2014 at 11:25 am | Reply
      • ProtectAmericanJobs

        Yes – You're right – They did shut down most of their factories in the areas surrounding the Olympics for 2 months prior to the start of the games just to try and improve the smog problem and so that it wouldn't give visitors a bad impression.

        May 7, 2014 at 6:05 pm |
      • moreofthislessofthat

        China is not "taking more steps." Again, leftists say the dumbest things. But the Chinese probably are concerned that they cannot breathe, their pollution regs are a joke. Just so you know, since 1985 when US and Chinese coal consumption were first equivilent,US coal consumption has fallen by 10% while Chinese consumption has increased 400%. So if stop using coal enteirely (down to zero) then based on current growth in Chinese coal consumption, they will match our savings with increased demand in less than 5 years. Then all the production will be in China and they will have achieved what the started out to do and have used you useful idiots to accomplish.

        May 7, 2014 at 9:25 pm |
      • t13

        "The Chinese have been taking more and more steps to fix their pollution issues" you haven't spent any time in China I take it. No government is really interested in it, even when they say they are, it's just for useful suckers like yourself.

        May 7, 2014 at 9:50 pm |
1 2

Leave a Reply to Pete


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.