“Meet the Press” pretends Marsha Blackburn has reasonable ideas about climate science because “debat

[DonViejo]

“Meet the Press” pretends Marsha Blackburn has reasonable ideas about climate science because “debate”

Giving climate science deniers like Marsha Blackburn a platform isn't a debate, it's a joke

KATIE MCDONOUGH

Why did “Meet the Press” call what transpired Sunday between Bill Nye and Marsha Blackburn a debate?

What actually happened was Nye, a children’s television host who is a science educator but not a climate scientist, spent 15 minutes trying his very best to convince Blackburn, a Republican member of the House with zero scientific credentials, that she should listen to the 97 percent of climate scientists who have concluded that human activity is warming the planet and that the consequences of that warming are going to be catastrophic in the relatively near future.

Before we get into their “debate,” let’s pretend for a moment that David Gregory invited Nye and Blackburn to “debate” the actual weather, and not, as he put it, “the politics of weather.” Nye, citing 97 percent of available thermostats, argues that it is 30 degrees in Washington, D.C. Blackburn, citing 3 percent of thermostats which have been proven faulty in the past, counters that it is 110 degrees. Gregory, who wore a thick winter coat and narrowly avoided ice slicks on his way into his D.C. office, then facilitates their “debate” on what the actual temperature is, being very careful to make sure both sides are given equal room to make their point.

We would never indulge such inanity about actual weather, and yet we continue to pretend climate science deniers hold credible ideas that are worthy of being heard and considered. And we continue to take people like Blackburn — who unlike Nye, has actual control over our climate policies — seriously rather than putting them to bed.

So back to Sunday, which was a disaster.

more
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/17/meet_the_press_pretends_marsha_blackburn_is_a_reasonable_person_with_reasonable_ideas_because_debate/

[IllinoisBirdWatcher]

1. Just like your local plumber doing cost-benefit analysis of open heart surgery.

Sure, your plumber and your heart surgeon both work with liquid circulation systems. Your plumber may actually understand heart surgery far better than Ms. Blackburn understands science.

So, lacking any understanding of the topic, Ms. Blackburn babbled about cost-benefit analysis and became the "death panel" member. All I heard from her was "The solution is too expensive, so do nothing."

"Marsha, Marsha, Marsha."

[spanone]

2. it elevates idiocracy....it's ridiculous. like having louie gohmert debate cancer with an oncologist

[Adrahil]

3. Sometimes people (including journalists) forget...

... that some ideas just suck.

Like the evolution "debate," the "debate" about climate change is very one-sided. There are things to discuss WITHIN the real science of climate-change, but in the climate change debate, we see the damage caused by outcome-based scientific "analysis."