OT: Bill Bill Bill Nye the Science Guy
- Thread starter RC1978
- Start date
I wish he would make videos for schools again. His old videos are finally starting to look dated, and no one (as far as I know) has stepped in to fill the void. Kids LOVE his videos. The production value is great, they teach you a lot, and they keep you laughing the whole time.
I was hoping Rutgers' own Chris Martine would fill the void, but his videos focus on just plants. I am on mobile so I can't embed a link, but here is one of Martine's videos. He is a professor at Bucknell.
Plants Are Cool, Too! Episode 2 : Fossilized Forests!: https://youtu.be/YfRXDbtkEi0
Posted from Rivals Mobile
I was hoping Rutgers' own Chris Martine would fill the void, but his videos focus on just plants. I am on mobile so I can't embed a link, but here is one of Martine's videos. He is a professor at Bucknell.
Plants Are Cool, Too! Episode 2 : Fossilized Forests!: https://youtu.be/YfRXDbtkEi0
Posted from Rivals Mobile
The world needs more celebrity scientists, and less reality TV celebrities. Bill Nye, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss and the late Carl Sagan are a few that come to mind. Unfortunately, science is made out as a villain by religious fundamentalists and the fossil fuel industry. Grade school teachers spend less and less time teaching science due to state testing in language arts and mathematics. My children (both in primary school) are lucky if they get 2 hours of science education/week. Young people need to be inspired to the magic of reality. With science, we vanquish the impossible.
HUGE problem in our schools!
I went to a public elementary school in Hudson County. The last ~two hours of the day were scheduled for science.
Unfortunately due to the ridiculous requirement for math and english in the state standardized tests the teachers never could fit in much time for science.
They didn't teach us actual material in any of the subjects actually. They only taught us how to pass a stupid standardized test.
You walk into some of these schools and there is literally a countdown banner in the main entrance saying " * DAYS UNTIL " Their only focus is standardized tests.
Fortunately for me I went to a magnet high school and was brought on the right track.
Entertaining personality. However, I do not agree with Bill's support of a carbon tax, in part, to redistribute wealth. He discusses his position in this 2+ minute YouTube clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeBeq0i03bg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeBeq0i03bg
"The science overwhelming supports the fact that climate change is REAL"
REAL dumb lol. Thankfully most of the country doesn't see a real threat despite the constant hysteria/indoctrination/cover-ups
Bill Nye is one of the many roack-star, wannbe geeks surfing the wave of junk science hysteria .
He was trying to scre everyine over Fuksihima too ( "This is all bad and very scary. ... You know, it's nothing but danger. It's nothing but very serious, very, very long-term problems." ) and extensive research has shown no long term problems; (more than 96 percent of food, fish etc near Fukushima has tested for less than one-sixth of the radiation permitted in food imported to Europe).
This post was edited on 4/4 5:10 PM by RU0517581
Food in Fukushima is Safe,
REAL dumb lol. Thankfully most of the country doesn't see a real threat despite the constant hysteria/indoctrination/cover-ups
Bill Nye is one of the many roack-star, wannbe geeks surfing the wave of junk science hysteria .
He was trying to scre everyine over Fuksihima too ( "This is all bad and very scary. ... You know, it's nothing but danger. It's nothing but very serious, very, very long-term problems." ) and extensive research has shown no long term problems; (more than 96 percent of food, fish etc near Fukushima has tested for less than one-sixth of the radiation permitted in food imported to Europe).
This post was edited on 4/4 5:10 PM by RU0517581
Food in Fukushima is Safe,
Classy comeback! Yes I did graduate from RU. I have a graduate degree in Entomology, a science, from RU. I also taught HS for many years, so maybe you can mock that also! I apologize that I will apparently never have the vastly superior intellect that you apparently believe you have.
I learned long ago that you do not change the long-held views of dedicated conservatives or liberals. Confirmation bias is too strong. So I am just going to state a few facts about science and then move on. You can continue your name-calling, but I will not be here.
The whole idea that global warming is just some concoction of climate scientists to gain funds or attention is absurd.
First, scientific research design requires both a control group and a design that shows the effect of one variable.
Second, statistical analysis of the results requires there to be at least a 95% probability that the results are correct and not due to chance or other variables.
Third, all scientific research is peer-reviewed. That means that other scientists not only look at the research, but they must search for any holes in the research that might show it to be inaccurate. Why? Follow-up research will build on the findings of that research, so they want to their own research to have a solid foundation. This is where they ask the hard questions.
Fourth the research must be duplicated by someone else before it is 100% accepted as fact.
All of this is intended to make sure research is not contaminated by personal bias. I remind you that scientists, like all the rest of us, have different political views. They occupy all parts of the political spectrum. Yet there is virtually unanimous support for the "carbon dioxide cause" hypothesis for climate change among those who actually do the climate research.
This does not mean there is NO possibility that all these scientific results supporting the hypothesis are incorrect. Major scientific beliefs have occasionally been over-turned when an insightful experiment showed that a new hypothesis better explained the scientific results than the time-honored one. The odds here are small however, certainly less than 5%, probably far less. The fact that so many critics are determined to show this hypothesis is inaccurate has in fact lowered the odds the results are wrong - since so many alternate explanations have been put forth already and determined to be wrong.
If you are a skeptic, I would hope you have at least found information supporting both sides of the issue before making your determination - rather than finding a book from an energy company - connected scientist and deciding that is the definitive resource.
IMO the economic consequences of this change in our climate are going to be grim indeed. The current drought situation in California is just a hint of the kinds of changes to our food supplies and life styles our grandchildren will be dealing with. I can only hope that your unsubstantiated beliefs will turn out to be right, in spite of the small statistical probability. For me it is hard to imagine we will be able to adapt effectively.
When was the last Ice age?
Patrick Moore Co Founder of GREEN PEACE - PHD in Ecology, B.sc. in Forest Biology
A rebel if there ever was one in the environmental movement, that put the movement on the front pages of the worlds news!
QUOTE from Patrick Moore
"There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth's atmosphere over the past 100 years," he said.
So if yer 4 steps were proven why is the "Carbon dioxide cause" a Hypothesis?
Can the human species exist without Carbon dioxide? Does more or less carbon dioxide affect plant growth?
Do plants make more oxygen if there is less carbon dioxide? or if there's more carbon dioxide?
Is the Global warming phenomena a Political movement a Religious movement or a scientific movement?
Is Al Gore a Scientist? Were facts in his movie "Inconvenient Truth" Lies? half truths or fabrications? (we already know some of his facts have been debunked) or just a way of making money for Al Gore? He was the voice of Global Warming early on wasn't he?
How did Shackleton in wooden ships get as far as they did in Antartica if the Ice pack was greater then, than it is now?
How did a modern ship full of environmentalists and global warming scientist just a couple of years ago get stuck in artic ice so thick it stopped a modern ship built to go into such waterways. And never reach where Shackleton's ship camped?
Yet the Ice pack is suppose to be less now than it was in Shackletons time of the earyl 1900's?
Yes as we can see Global Warming due to man is settled science!
Lawrence Krauss was down here at Otago speaking at the same event as Moms Skillethead and I (we actually followed his presentation). Got to hang out with him some. Really interesting guy and a very good public communicator of complex scientific issues.
I saw him at the Seattle Bumbershoot festival last year. He was doing a live radio broadcast with a panel of scientists and comics. It was great and he is excellent. Kudos on the choice.
