Global Warming on Larry King

Why did Bill Nye allow himself to get trapped into talking so much about the thermo-haline circulation?

The scenarios on that are all over the place, but at this point it appears to most experts that the Gulf Stream will persist quite well even if we get enough melting to cause havoc for coastal populations.

I address similar concerns in my review of a book I think is closer to the mark. Click my name to read my comparative review of The Weather Makers by Tim Flannery and Field Notes from a Catastrophe by Elizabeth Kolbert.

We really need to be careful to put caveats on our descriptions of various scenarios.

I like Bill Nye but Lindzen mopped the floor with him.

The show was the AGW circus in microcosm. Larry King reminded my of a kid with a jar dropping a red ant in with a black ant and trying to get them to fight. It could have been done with hand puppets for all the real information presented.

Ummm, Sheril, what was your purpose in posting that clip?

I can imagine using it as a way to explore how different people use the F word. (Ahem. The one with five letters.) Is that what you had in mind?

etbnc,
I posted the clip becaue it highlights the importance of communication and the power and influence of science in the media.

Global warming is often portayed as a great debate which obviously garners higher ratings by hyping up controversy. In Congress, I often attended briefings as a staffer where very articulate speakers with seemingly impressive credentials came to discuss 'The Hockey Stick debate' complete with references to Michael Crichton. To me and the minority of other scientists in the audience, holes were often evident in their arguments, however to the majority of nonscientists in the room, points came across as reasonable. Remember now, the audience was made up of the very same individuals informing their bosses (our policymakers) on critical issues like global warming.

But these experiences were surprisingly valuable as well. What I learned was not in the content provided, but rather about the significance of approach. I also gained insight to become better prepared when others ask me questons on the subject because I have a more informed idea of counter arguments that are being circulated.

So this clip is meant to keep us thinking about the importance of how science is portrayed outside of our comfort zone. We need to be prepared.

Sheril, I really liked your response. We often see this sort of thing going on. The critics points may not hold water scientifically, but with most of the audience being not very scientific, they can often be very effective. We of course have been trained not to treat the establishment of truth, as a popularity contest. Unfortunately in the public sphere it usually is.

Featuring Nye against Lindzen was an intentional set-up by King (or, more charitably, a choice based on maximizing entertainment value). There are literally dozens of people with qualifications in the same league as Lindzen's that they could have gotten, so it's very clear that they made a choice to avoid them. Heck, several such people can be found within a few hundred feet of Lindzen's office at MIT -- Kerry Emanuel and Carl Wunsch, e.g.

As has often been pointed out, even where there are equal qualifications deniers will always have the advantage in a "sound bite" venue since it takes longer to refute a claim than it does to make it. Add to that, in this instance, Nye's relative lack of knowledge and credentials, and the outcome was inevitable. I suspect the THC business was a result of Nye not keeping up with the science, since IIRC several years ago the prospect of a THC shut-down had more credibility (although even then it was a minority view).

Isn't this another example of what lawyers do routinely in the wordsmithing masquerade? Throw pepper in everybody's eyes, call it linguistic genius, and collect money and status by doing it.

It is a variation of the O. J. Simpson farce. Lawyering and peeyar. Larry King is a showman. What is new?

Mooney and Nisbet want science, the only system that expressly forbids lying, cheating, or distorting, to get with the program. Be ahead of the curve.

Nye's a smart guy, but was way out of his league.

This kind of thing is pretty much par for the course for Larry King. Many years ago, probably in the early 90s, some poor guy from the Sierra Club (who clearly had minimal climatology background) got absolutely destroyed by Pat Michaels on King's show. I don't know if there was any effort made to find someone qualified to appear with Michaels, or if the deck was stacked intentionally.