Comments
-
@lilwhiteboyz, yeah, I think their main demographic were younger kids like in elementary school, which is where I was introduced to him in my science class. He really helps boiled down what could have been fairly complex ideas for a kid into really simple demonstrations and skits. Personally I found him to be pretty funny at the time, but I understand that different people have different senses of humor. At any rate, I appreciate your honest opinion!
-
@TheRealDrummerBoyASD, I Loved Bill Nye growing up He's the reason I became an engineer I've seen him in person twice now and I can safely say he's actually kind of a dick in real life. best example I can think of was he was doing a speaking engagement at my college where they let people from all over town in and this little girl pitched a silly idea for him to use scuba divers to clean the trash out of the ocean. Of course she was like nine so it wasn't really that great of an idea but we all expected him to encourage her to keep her creative process going and keep researching how to make the world a better place. But, instead he pretty much just said"that's a dumb idea" and then moved on to the next question. Honestly I think he's a little salty that his scientific career never went further than his show and so that's why he is the way he is now, it's unfortunate but he did inspire a whole new generation of scientists and engineers at least
-
@PatroniumXC, yeah, and while I agree we should have policies to help keep the environment clean I also think there’s a time and place to discuss politics. He’s a scientist and climate change isn’t even in his field nor is he a politician. If he wants to use his platform to showcase ideas and solutions to our problems while bringing a better awareness to these problems that’s fine, more than fine that’s perfect. Just keep politics out of it. Most politicians have an alternate agenda and hide behind “going green” as a talking point knowing they’ll never deliver on these promises. Which is why I think the scientists should just stick to the science of the issue
-
@TheRealDrummerBoyASD, not off the top of my head, and it’s been years since I’ve bothered paying any attention to him. The most obvious fact/opinion conflation revolved around climate change, if you want examples I would start there. Sorry I’m not giving specific examples, but I can’t be bothered to hunt any down.
-
@PatroniumXC, well, first off, the planet isn’t dying. The climate appears to be changing, but it’s always changing. A lot of the data has been poorly reported and has truly handicapped meaningful discussions about how humans are impacting the environment. A great example of this is the yearly burning of farmland in Brazil and Argentina, big news last year, but it was an average to slightly below average burn year, but people lost their minds over it. I could go on, but I’d rather sleep. All I can say is anything you hear on CNN or the Discovery channel, take it with a large salt block. And it would behoove you to look up how science is funded in the USA and around the world.
-
@Hot Coffee, you lost your credibility at “the planet isn’t dying.” The amount we warmed the planet since the industrial revolution is much faster than the “natural” temperature change cycle throughout earth’s history. The last few ice ages have only had an average global temperature of 2-5 degrees colder than it is now, and we’ve gone up over 1 degree in less than 200 years. Even if we go down to net 0 carbon emissions by 2050 were already guaranteed to lose ~75% of all coral reefs, which are depended upon by 25% of all marine life. It’s estimated that if we continue to emit at our current rate, we could lose 30-50% of all animal and plant species within the century. Humans are responsible for unprecedented change to the planet based on fossil records and could end up wiping out more species than the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago
-
@PatroniumXC, oh dear, you dun drunk da kool aid. 30% - 50% loss of species! Score! So you’re telling me that 50% - 70% of species will survive if nothing changes. That’s not so bad. Way better than an mass extinction level event. You’re right about needing to produce the majority of electricity from nuclear power. It’s weird how much “environmentalist” seem to love coal generated power plants. You’d think they, of all people, would be on board with nuclear energy. Stupid is as stupid does, amirite? When are we getting the rise in sea levels again? I am looking for some future beach front property.
Bet she will still have dinner though