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.
Reader Comments
Here is what Bill Nye said at the end, for humor's sake:
"So, you know, you guys are the mainstream media, and I can tell you why there are leaks. Because the president has created two factions in his - administration. They don't like each other. So they leak. It's not from the outside; it's from the inside. Carry on, Mr. Carlson, I'm sure we will cross paths again."
We are currently scheduled to begin a grand solar minimum with a severe drop in radient energy. Better be thankful for whatever greanhouse effect there might be as it will help mitigate the extreme cold that is expected. Bill Nye was is irrelevant.
Any movement - whether the movement is from a butterfly, a person, an animal, treses, the oceans, the moon, a planet, or a machine - kicks up a disturbance of ancient dust. The displaced dust moves outwardly and upwards. You will have noticed this clearly as a pedestrian when a car whooshes past. Essentially, the airflow, drenched with matter, billows somewhere else and is often lifted up into the atmosphere.
Any 'billow' of matter creates a ripple that, in my opinion, will logically have a causative effect on the prevailing winds and therefore on the climate.
In this way, the hurried and weighty movements of mankind is partly to blame for the increases in storms and the geological stress on the earth.
The swimming pool is empty and the surface water appears smoothe, moved gently only by the pumps. Now everyone in swimming and playing around in the pool. the water is pushed in different directions and a veritable turbulence of waves is clearly visible. The waves ripple in all directions and interfere with each other.
With this picture in mind, is it any wonder that whales and dolphins are beaching themselves? There is so much mercantile movement crisis-crossing the high seas, sloshing up a turbulence of water that the highly sensitive sonar and echo-locution abilities of these extraordinary creatures become confused and disoriented; they can't make sense of the hectic crisis-crossing motion of our ships in their waters.
noise, not nose
But, the guy who came up with the electric universe theory, James Mccanney predicted what would happen to Jupiter before it was hit, and they don't want to listen to him because he was denied his phd ...
An engineer is not any more qualified. Anyway, a theory should speak for itself with data. Mccanney has been right, the global warming folks are doing hind sight data repairs.
Cognitive dissonance in academia.
So while Nye is attempting to answer Carlson's questions, he continues to change the questions. When he asks Nye, "What percentage..." Nye says, "100%, if that's the number you're looking for." When Carlson asks what the climate would look like if Man hadn't interfered, Nye proposes it would look like it did in the 1750s. I grant that these answers aren't as in-depth as I'm sure Carlson's weighty intellect deserves, not to mention those massive brains that are so devoted to watching Fox news, for that matter, but in any case, Nye was attempting to answer the questions in between Carlson's raving and ad hominem attacks. But this is the same tired set-up one can see with nearly any "opposing" guest on Fox. In fact, watching and rewatching this only reveals the typical standard of Fox "News" - to remain louder and more absurd than your guest while pushing some kind of back twisting agenda; e.g. in this case, climate change is real, but it's not, so prove it, but you can't, so I don't have to believe you, but I have an open mind to everything you're saying, but you're a liar, and I want to know what percentage is manmade, but when you say 100%, I'll change the question, then claim you're speaking a different language, then claim you haven't answered any questions.
But I guess this is what passes for entertainment these days.