A TSA Screener Questioned Bill Nye The Science Guy

News notes from around the interweb:

About Gary Leff

Gary Leff is one of the foremost experts in the field of miles, points, and frequent business travel - a topic he has covered since 2002. Co-founder of frequent flyer community InsideFlyer.com, emcee of the Freddie Awards, and named one of the "World's Top Travel Experts" by Conde' Nast Traveler (2010-Present) Gary has been a guest on most major news media, profiled in several top print publications, and published broadly on the topic of consumer loyalty. More About Gary »

More articles by Gary Leff »

Comments

  1. What is climate change activist Bill Nye doing flying anyway? Just another in a long line of hypocrites. All the benefits of fossil fuels and capitalism for me, but not your you plebes. If you are going to prattle on about the world being in a crisis due to some particular activity, and you continue to do said activity, then you are either a fraud or a sociopath, or both.

  2. He’s flying because republicans won’t invest for the US to have clean energy, high speed trains that he can take instead of flying.

  3. WR2 +1

    Plus the TSA person was teasing Nye, and Nye was using the tease to look down his nose at people. What a clown!

    Besides, Nye is not a scientist. He has a show for kids, like the Muppets.

  4. Bill Nye was an engineer for Boeing back even it was a top notch shop.

    It’s reasonable to want a system to change but still live within that system. The use of fossil fuels as a purity test is the logical fallacy of false dichotomy.

    Sorry that there aren’t enough safe spaces left for climate-change denying snowflakes.

  5. I’ve not been in a public school in decades so, I’ll ask: they do still teach science, don’t they? I’d think that the Earth is an orb would be one of the first things they teach. If not, what? It’s not a question of “upping our science education game” at all because this is entry level science, step one ( or close to it anyway).

  6. @Eric. Since you are a man of science, I am hoping you could explain why Antarctica Ice is not shrinking on a consist basis during the last 20 years. Actually some studies say Antarctica is growing. Climate models are predicting that both ice caps should be melting on a rapid pace to meet the UN dire climate predictions (12 years a year ago).

    I am guess when you were watching your hero Nye the Bow Tie, he did not cover that conundrum.

  7. President Trump has a word for people like Sad State of Our Country. LOSERS And when Trump wins again I have a comment: “HA HA HA HA……”

  8. You can see from the comments here why Trump won. Americans are fiercely proud of their stupidity. Like the dumb question on Antarctica. A simple Google search shows that “its growing” is a stupid take …. but yet the resident genius throws it out there to “own the libs”. Because he/she/it can’t search online.

    So f’in dumb.

  9. @Other Just Saying

    Heh? You’re totally wrong.
    https://www.pnas.org/content/116/4/1095
    Figure 3.

    As you can see, the mass of ice in/on/around Antarctica is dropping at a rapidly increasing rate.

    Ah, whatever, your denial of climate change is an emotional belief, you aren’t going to be convinced by rational argument and observed data.

    Sorry to trigger you.

  10. @Bratty. I am not a Science Guy with a Bow Tie like Nye.

    However, the science behind man-made global warming theory being an existential threat is weak. I just picked the Antartica Ice, because it is easy. You pick the so called proof and I will tell you why it is weak science. Go for it.

    This has really become a form of political science, rather than real science. In fact, it is giving science a bad name. How do you generated trillions of dollars of taxes, tell everyone that carbon (which is involved with all life and economic activities) is destroying the planet and tax the crap out of it for the good of the planet. Then skim money off the top to live the good life.

    Now you may say, what is the harm? Instead of a global carbon tax, if we put together a fleet of ships to clean the ocean, just think how much good we could do. And our economy would still be in tact to continuously pay for this fleet.

  11. Lolz, if anyone is curious how absurdly incorrect @Other Just Sayin is, Google:
    “Four decades of Antarctic Ice Sheet mass balance from 1979–2017”
    Figure 3

    The ice in/around/on Antarctica is dropping precipitously. Our economies will have to deal with that lost ice as sea level rise.

    Ah, nevermind, categorical disbelief in the overwhelming evidence of global warming is an emotional belief system, totally unphased by objective observation and facts.

    Sorry again to trigger you, Other.

  12. @Eric. I was referring to studies a couple of years ago that were showing Ice growing in Antarctica. However, this is the problem with conclusions, new data. Each reading gives a new set of data, to be analyzed. Of course, political science only reports the data that supports their conclusion, ignoring data that contradicts their conclusion, that New York will be under 10 feet of water in 12 years. Why, because of fires in Australia and California, and hurricanes in Florida.

    Oh, by the way, did your article mention that they found over 90 volcanos Antarctica and they might have something to do with Ice mass changes.

    I am busy doing a miles run, to ruin the planet. Cherio.

  13. @Other, well I suppose I should commend your intellectual honesty in admitting that your decision making model and conclusions regarding climate change are unable to adapt to new evidence and observations. It’s an interesting change in tone from, “guess when you were watching your hero Nye the Bow Tie…”

    Unfortunately, for those of us left in the real world rather than in a comfortable cocoon of ignorance, policy and other decisions will need to be based real world observations.

    Run along…

  14. @Eric. Just to comment. The argument from a couple of years ago (about 2015) was that the Arctic ice levels are a stupid measure, because nobody know much about the under water currents that warm or do not warm the ice from underneath. The Antarctic ice was considered a better measure, since it is on top of land. Therefore, there is no underwater heater to compromise the measurements. And according to 2015 articles, Ice was growing in Antarctic. However, in 2017, they discovered over 90 volcanos under the ice in Antarctic. Therefore, the Antarctic is also not a good measure, because knowledge about volcano melting is unknown. Of course, an unbiased scientist, would admit that conclusions about Ice thickness were speculative at best, because of the contaminating factors. At minimum, an unbiased scientist would state a caveat, before proceeding to his global warming conclusions. If you do not see that, you have an advocate. Just saying.

    However, I do commend you for actually coming up with a scientific article that was interesting to read, although my ability to evaluate those graphs without putting more time that I want was limited.

    Normally, people will start citing UN studies, which are political in nature. Basically, they throw all the actual scientists out of the room when they decide on final language. There are many scientists that have complained about final language. Real scientists are not given to wild speculations about future weather, that the UN studies engages in on a regular basis.

  15. If I didn’t know better, I would say @Other Just Saying is our favorite Hilton apologist dcs! Such similar styles, can’t let anyone have the last word, doesn’t let logic interfere with his arguments etc etc etc

  16. Lost all respect after his woke turn but in honor of that and TSA….

    “My sex junk is so gr-o-o-oped”

  17. I have to imagine the demographic commenting on a FF/travel blog is above average on income and education for a variety of reasons.
    That being the case, after much consideration and research here, I conclude that America is f****d.
    To think we have (at least) 5 more years of this is tragic.

  18. He’s really “the engineering guy”, because he is not a scientist, just an engineer. And BTW, there was a time when all scientists agreed the earth was flat. So much for science by opinion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *