Posted on 02/28/2017 1:33:18 PM PST by servo1969
Here is the best (and weirdest) example of cognitive dissonance you will ever see. The set-up is that Bill Nye, an engineer by training, and a proponent of science, is defending climate science on Tucker's show.
The first weird thing is that Bill Nye starts by talking about cognitive dissonance being the only reason that anyone would be skeptical of global warming. But he seems to not understand the concept of cognitive dissonance because he believes only the other side could be experiencing it. The nature of cognitive dissonance is that you don't know you're in it when you're in it. It is only obvious to observers. If Nye had been objective, he would have noted two equal possibilities: Either the skeptics are experiencing cognitive dissonance or the proponents of climate science are experiencing it. But whoever is in it can't know. It is only obvious to the other side. That's how it works.
Yes, I do the same thing all the time. I call out my critics for being in cognitive dissonance and act as if the problem couldn't be on my end. But in my case, the context is usually that I'm teaching you how to spot it. And I also talk about the specific triggers and "tells" so you can check my work. This video has a clear trigger and an enormous tell. Best example you will ever see.
The set-up for the trigger is that Nye's self-image is that of a rational supporter of science with a command of the facts about climate science. He has made a career recently of defending science, and climate science in particular. Nye's ego depends on being consistent with his pro-science, rational stance. That's who he is.
Tucker then asked Nye a simple question about climate science. He asked how much of the warming is caused by human activity. Nye's entire ego depended on knowing whether human activity is contributing to climate change in a big way, a medium way, or a small way. Tucker wanted some details. How much difference do humans make? After all, Nye had said this was settled science. Tucker just wanted to know what that settled science said.
Nye didn't know. And by not knowing that simple answer about the percentage of human contribution to warming - the only issue that really mattered to the topic - he proved in public that his opinions on science are not based on facts or knowledge. Nye tried and tried to dodge the question, but Tucker was relentless. That was the trigger. Nye could plainly see, thanks to Tucker's simple question, that his belief in science was just a belief, because he didn't actually know the science. When your self-image and ego get annihilated on live television, you can't simply admit you have been ridiculous all along. Your brain can't let you do that to yourself. So instead, it concocts weird hallucinations to force-glue your observations into some sort of semi-coherent movie in which you are not totally and thoroughly wrong. That semi-coherent movie will look like a form of insanity to observers.
Look for Nye to go totally mental in the last minute of the clip, changing the topic to political leaks for no apparent reason. That's your tell. His brain just sort of broke right in front of you.
People do and say dumb things all the time, and it isn't always cognitive dissonance. That's why you look for the trigger to make sure the "tell" was what you thought it was.
To be fair, spotting cognitive dissonance is more like bird-watching than science. Sometimes you misidentify a bird. But this example is like an ostrich sitting on your lap. Hard to miss. Enjoy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN5L2q6hfWo
You’re burying yourself, Bill.
In his blog, Adams has really been doing a great job of exposing the fallacies of the whole climate change debate for months now. This article is a great demonstration of much of what he’s been saying and Nye provides all the evidence for him.
It was too hard to watch all of the video.
I saw that last night. Nye seemed to have mental bReaktor in the last few minutes, just like Mr. Adams said. I mean like a obvious WTH type mental break.
You really should watch to the end. Unhinged Nye has lost the argument, so he launches into an attack on Trump, explaining that “the leaks have come from the inside”. The guy is completely bonkers. He wasn’t even asked about Trump. Or leaks.
“bReaktor” should be “break”
That interview was epic, and I’ve seen most all of Tucker’s interviews of assorted leftwing nuts. Nye doesn’t do so well when he’s not reading from a script pretending to be the “Science Guy”. Tucker got him so riled up, the junk-science guy coming across as downright creepy at the end.
Watched it last night. Tucker was great pushing his point. Nye gave me a bad case of head scratching
Damn shame Professor Proton didn’t finish him off when he had a chance.
Bill Nye...the idiot guy.
Agreed.
He call Fox News the Mainstream Media!
And then went off on a rant about the WH leaks. What does that have to do with climate change?
It was a subconscious admission that the entire matter is political. The two are intimately connected in the mind of Bill Nye, such as it is.
Bill Nye the senile guy.
I heard Nye make a point that coastal areas will be inundated and that the interior of the U.S. will be flooded in a warming scenario.
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.
We don’t have to wonder what global warming looks like. Here it is, in the Cretaceous, with NO polar ice at all and with flora and fauna populating Antarctica.
https://australianmuseum.net.au/image/map-of-world-late-cretaceous
Global warming already happened—10 degrees by all accounts—and the results were not as dire as folks are making it out to be.
Also, so was Mr Science implying that we should all be living pre-Industrial (pre-1850s). Back when we were burning coal and wood for heat and lighting our lamps with whale oil.
Biggest fraud around...after obozo
Everything you need to know about the climate change agenda was stated quite clearly by the UN's top climate official in 2015:
"This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history.
"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 - you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation."
--Christiane Fugueres, Executive Secretary of UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change)
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.