It's weird that it's actually irresponsible for CNN as a news organization to have the vice chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee on to talk about climate change as if her views represented some kind of reasonable alternative to Nye's and there was some sort of actual debate here.
Well I hate to sound like I'm pigeon-holing all scientists into a group of people, but there is a level of charisma that comes with the role. A scientist's job is, well, to hopefully inform the president on issues like climate change so said president will know what to say.
Sadly yeah. He's already painted into a corner - any refusal to debate will be met with a "SEE, MISTER SCIENCE IS AFRAID OF THE TRUTH" and every debate will lead to at best another debate where nothing new will be said be he's expected to rebut it again, with exactly the same result.
There will always be another looking to make a name for himself by challenging Bill Nye; they have nothing to lose by debating him, and they will do this until he refuses.
There is a response to the "afraid of the truth" thing, but it requires a degree of impoliteness that is considered off-putting so double-edged sword. "If you really think scientists are full of it, put your money where your mouth is, and give up every comfort science has brought you over the past 150 years. Once you tire of living without electricity, you can let me know (presumably by carrier pigeon) and we can then agree that science knows what it's talking about."
But I doubt Bill Nye is willing to go there, so yeah, he's going to keep at this until intellectual dishonesty finally wins.
Reddit
Digg
Stumble
Facebook