Bill Nye proves he doesn't know environmental science

Bill Nye: Older people need to 'die' out before climate science can advance

Bill Nye specifically targeted the elderly this week as he spoke out against climate change deniers, saying that climate science will start to advance when old people start to "age out," according to a report.

The "Science Guy" said that generationally, the majority of climate change deniers are older.

"Climate change deniers, by way of example, are older. It's generational," Nye told the Los Angeles Times. Nye said that he is calling them out with "due respect," acknowledging that he is "now one of them."

"We're just going to have to wait for those people to 'age out,' as they say," Nye went on, adding that "age out" is a euphemism for "die." "But it'll happen, I guarantee you — that'll happen."

See, that just proves that Nye doesn't know climate science. Presumably, since Nye included himself in the denier generation, he means Boomers like me. (Nye is two months, 20 days younger than I.) The oldest Boomers are only about 72 years old, the youngest are not even 55. That means that it's going to take about 35 more years for us to be gone, and many of us will linger on well after that.

Thirty. Five. Years. Before anything can be substantially done to arrest climate change, according to Bill Nye.

We do not have that long to save the planet, and if Bill Nye is really a "science guy" he should know that. After all, "experts say we have three years to get climate change under control. And they’re the optimists."

A group of prominent scientists, policymakers, and corporate leaders released a statement Wednesday warning that if the world doesn’t set greenhouse gas emissions on a downward path by 2020, it could become impossible to contain climate change within safe limits.

I am not a scientist, but I play one on TV.

So don't listen to Bill Nye any more. He does not know the science!

Remember, though, that the Left's newly-approved position on controlling climate change is to get rid of people: "Want To Slow Global Warming? Researchers Look To Family Planning."

A recent study from Lund University in Sweden shows that the biggest way to reduce climate change is to have fewer children. 

"I knew this was a sensitive topic to bring up," says study co-author Kimberly Nicholas on NPR's Morning Edition. "Certainly it's not my place as a scientist to dictate choices for other people. But I do think it is my place to do the analysis and report it fairly." 

The study concludes that four high-impact ways to reduce CO2 gas emissions include having fewer children, living without a car, avoiding airplane travel and eating a vegetarian diet.

Get that? "Certainly it's not my place as a scientist to dictate choices for other people." Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Her disclaimer would not be necessary if she really believed that.

The article says that Ms. Nicholas is engaged to be married, but when asked, she declined to promise reducing the number of children she and her future husband plan to bear.

So, as the saying goes, I'll believe it's a crisis when the people who say it's a crisis themselves act as if it's a crisis.

Reducing the number of children the proles have can hardly be sufficiewnt to save the planet for the nomenklatura's future paradise. After all, if saving the world depends on cutting the population, then why settle for passive measures and merely hope that we proles will obey?

Remember John Holdren?

He was President Obama's Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, a.k.a. the president's "Science Czar."

Here is what Holdren said in his book, Ecoscience, co-authored by Holdren and his colleagues Paul Ehrlich (yes, that Paul Ehrlich) and Anne Ehrlich. This is the totalitarian mind in full flower:

But this is entirely consistent with the whole world view of the Left: You are the problem and there are simply too many of you. Remember: When they say they want to "change the world," what they mean is they want to change you. As columnist David Harsanyi has pointed out, they are convinced "we have too much freedom with which to make too many stupid choices."

BTW, "In 1985 Holdren predicted a billion deaths from climate-related famine by the end of this decade." Try as I might, I cannot find any reference to such a massive die-off.