Posted on 02/28/2017 1:33:18 PM PST by servo1969
Nye came off as a complete loonytune, but I was disappointed in Tucker last night. He was not as well prepared to debate Nye on the climate change issue as he should have been.
There were so many good arguments he could have presented on the skeptic side.
Man-made global warming? Please explain the Middle Warming Period.
Yes, Carlson set him up and he walked right into it.
If there was no human activity, who were the wine makers making wine for? And why were there any human wine makers if there were no humans?
The whole thing was beyond silly.
I did. The fossil remains from Antarctica show that the continent was once a lush polar forest. Not sure where the 10 degree figure came from, but I don't see how you get a lush forest if the ice caps were still there so it obviously was quite a bit hotter then.
Or it wasn't a pole, then.
Yeah - pretty sure those fossils are from when Antarctica was farther north, or maybe even when it was part of one of those super continents.
I was at a talk where the gal from NASA was talking about the south pole looking for meteorites. Due to the sublimation (evaporation) of the ice it concentrates the meteorites. She made a joke like “So - GO global warming! Yay!!” (Of course she also had the photo of the thermometer when she was there in the summer, showing -40 degrees or something.
So of course global warming isn’t causing higher temperatures that will cause the ice to melt.
Antarctica was in the same position in the Cretaceous it is now--at the pole.
Look, I'm not a geologist. But every reconstruction I've seen has Antartica at the pole during this time. Even when it was smashed together with other continents it was still in the extreme south.
If there's a reconstruction that says different, please point me to it, because I use this argument a lot.
That’s true. But you know what he left out? The polar areas will go from frozen wastelands to productive forests. Global temperatures will likely be more moderate as a result of increased evaporation and humidity.
...
Tucker asked the right question. To what degree have humans caused climate change? Another good question I like is what’s the optimum temperature?
Scientists have always called past periods of warming “optimums.”
What was missed was Nye’s claim that the climate should currently be like 1750. That was near the middle of the little ice-age, hardly optimal.
What changed?
.
Bill Nye is no scientist, he is an agitator.
And he also lies profusely.
Wine was produced in abundance in England in the 15th century.
.
“Antarctica has sat at much the same latitude for the last hundred million years. But during the Cretaceous it enjoyed a warmer, lusher climate, similar to that of the U.S. Pacific Northwest today. (The Cretaceous period started 144 million years ago and ended 65 million years ago.)”
I guess I'm thinking of earlier years. Yes - your observations make sense to most of us that realize that the earth has been changing for a long, long time.
(Although didn't the Model T come out in the late Cretaceous, and is believed to have killed all the dinosaurs?)
That I don't know, sorry. I'm sure the answer is in the literature somewhere.
I'm not.
Exactly. Their whole argument seems to be focused on the dire things that will happen to coastal areas and islands being flooded.
Well, sure, ok.
But you're gaining all this lush forest in the polar areas that are almost biological deserts now. And the Great basin of the US will go from an arid scrub desert to a shallow inland sea. Which is one of the most productive marine ecosystems--like a Mediterranean in the Western Hemisphere.
It's not doom and gloom. Just--different.
All I got out of this interview was that Nye the Lie Guy is upset that wine-worthy grapes can be grown in the UK. Don’t tell him that wine vineyards existed in Roman times or his head will explode.
You sure wouldn’t want to tell him that the Vikings were growing vineyards in Greenland from 800 AD to 1,200 AD.
Exactly! And Nye is the typical arrogant proggie overtalking bigmouth that cannot answer straightforward questions. Just a socialist talking points regurgitator that got comfortable because kiddies listened to him and smiled. At the end, we see the hate in his eyes. He’s a nasty-hearted man.
That argument is funny if you actually read the details. The companies were clearly doing simple due diligence on the matter with a sampling of studies...which were scattered and contradictory.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.