Neil deGrasse Tyson scolds cherry picking climate science

Sonia you’re not a primate scientist but
you’re a very distinguished scientist and astrophysicist what do you think
about when people say look this is not settled science there are still
questions I sometimes think to myself look there are a lot of questions still
about Einstein’s theories that led to nuclear fission but we still know that
nuclear power plants do operate and they do provide electricity and yeah so
what’s happening here is they’re people who have cultural political religious
economic philosophies that they then invoke when they want to cherry-pick one
scientific result or another you can find a scientific paper that says
practically anything and the press which I count you as part of the press will
sometimes find a single paper so here’s a new truth if this study holds it but
an emergent scientific truth for it to become an objective truth the truth that
is true whether or not you believe in it it requires more than one scientific
paper it requires a whole system of people’s research all leaning in the
same direction all pointing to the same consequences that’s what we have with
climate change as induced by human conduct this is a known correspondence
if you want to find the 3% of the papers or the 1% of the papers that conflicted
with this and build policy on that that is simply irresponsible and what how
else do you establish a scientific truth if not by looking at the consensus of
scientific experiments and scientific observations Abraham Lincoln the first
Republican President signed into law in 1963 a year when he had important things
to be thinking about he signed into law the the National Academy of Sciences
because he knew that science mattered and should matter in governance and and
it and you know we build our cities on the basis of science we win you know
when when we fall ill we don’t we don’t go to the local witch doctor right go to
a doctor even though all that science is still you know I mean
there are advances gonna be made none of it is settled in the sense well so you
know what it’s settled you know it is settled settled science is the science
that has come out of large bodies of research that all agree when you see
scientists arguing and I tweeted I said if you think scientists want to always
agree with one another you’ve never been to a scientific conference because the
people are duking it out but what are they fighting over not the settled
science that’s been in the books we’re fighting over the the the bleeding edge
of what is not yet known and and that is the natural course of science and a few
as a journalist want to eavesdrop on that meeting you’ll think scientists
don’t know anything about anything but is the body of knowledge that is
accumulated over the decades that precedes this that becomes the Canon of
what if you’re gonna base policy and legislation on that’s what you should be
thinking about so you would say this is a moment to listen to climate science I
think this 50 inches of I can’t even picture
how many raindrops is that 50 inches of rain in Houston this is this is a shot
across our about a hurricane the width of Florida going up the center of
Florida these are these are shots across our bow that what what will it take for
people to recognize that a community of scientists are learning objective truths
about the natural world and that you can benefit from knowing about it even news
reports on this channel talked about the the fact that we have fewer deaths per
hurricane why because you now know weeks in advance we have models that have
trajectories of hurricanes in a decades gone by it was like there’s a hurricane
there we don’t know should I stay should I go and then you stay and you die okay
so to cherry-pick science it’s an odd thing for a scientist to observe and I
don’t I didn’t grow up in a country where that was a common phenomenon we
went to the moon and people knew Science and Technology fed those discoveries and
the day to politicians are arguing about whether science is true it means nothing
gets done nothing it’s the beginning of the end of an infant
to democracy as I’ve said many times what I’d rather happen is you recognize
what is scientifically truth then you have your political debate so in the
case of energy policy whatever it’s you you don’t ask is the science right you
ask should we have carbon credits or or whatever right response right exactly
what is the economic dimension of this that’s where the politics needs to come
in and it’s not the longer we delay the more I worry that we might not be able
to recover from this because all our greatest cities are on the oceans and
water’s edges historically for Commerce and transportation and as storms kick in
as water levels rise they are the first to go and we don’t have a system we
don’t have a civilization with the capacity to pick up a city and move it
inland 20 miles that’s this is happening faster than our ability to respond that
could have a huge economic consequences on that sobering note Neil deGrasse
Tyson always a pleasure and we are in a hurry to read the book thanks


  1. Lone Star

    August 7, 2019 at 1:18 pm

    Personally i don't know what to believe. On one hand you got all these people on tv keep on saying were all going die for the last 30 years. And then nothing happens. On the other hand you have people who angry because there taxes might go up.

  2. george liavas

    August 7, 2019 at 2:26 pm

    Modern science is all fantasy. They don't even know what to believe in anymore. Darwinism is being abandoned. Peer reviewed papers are corrupt. Science has become political.

  3. Russell Roth

    August 7, 2019 at 7:50 pm

    The scientific community's "consensus" is trash. Here is the definitive explanation of the fake science of climate change.

  4. john smith

    August 8, 2019 at 4:07 am

    astrophysicist have no scientific proof of anything only theories. most science is based off theories or as he said thing that are not known

  5. Don farlan

    August 8, 2019 at 5:37 am

    Who knows really but carbon is an element to consider yet there's less burning of wood than there was once.but yet catalytic converters as an example of man trying to right a wrong could merely change one form of pollution into a more dangerous one has anyone considered that as a cause of climate interference and distruction

  6. Itzahk Pearlman

    August 8, 2019 at 11:11 am

    Galileo would be ridiculed by today's scientists

  7. Fur Queue

    August 8, 2019 at 1:11 pm

    Probably just stop at "you're not a climate scientist".

    If I want to 'find Pluto' up a girl's skirt I'll call you, Tyson

  8. bruce clothier

    August 8, 2019 at 9:39 pm

    No Neil, you are being irresponsible. There is no concensus that global warming is real. And this is from 100s of climatologists, physicists, and other degree carrying scientists. Is CO2 going up? Yes. Is a doubling of CO2 going to cause the effects you say they are? Most good science says no. Historically, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has been over 1000 ppm, not the nearly 400ppm we have now. So I think you should stick to the subject you know

  9. star cruiser

    August 9, 2019 at 3:13 am

    The cherry picking is not bad because if the hypothesis was true all the data should line up. The cherry picking reveals that there are vast ammounts of data correcting (tampering)

  10. Ryan G.

    August 10, 2019 at 11:37 am

    We don't build our cities on the basis of science, they're built on rock n roll.

  11. Jeff Rodgers

    August 10, 2019 at 5:19 pm

    When this guy goes off-script he shows where his intellect lies.

  12. Refined Insanity

    August 10, 2019 at 6:08 pm

    Hey, don't you know it's a waste of your day
    Caught up in endless solutions
    That have no meaning
    Just another hunch, based upon jumping conclusions
    Backed up against a wall of confusion
    Caught up in endless solutions
    Living a life of illusion

  13. David Linton

    August 10, 2019 at 7:44 pm

    That's Where cherry picking just said something very interesting lets people are killed in hurricanes than in past years why you shaved because technology we have weeks morning okay so that's proven science toucan facts whatever you want to call it science or not. So what about how long has man been on this planet and creating planet change as far as carbon dioxide and all the pollution that we've been creating. And how many climate changes has this planet been through since it's been around lots and lots so your science only goes so far. And it's awful funny that most of those scientists I paid for or the studies have been paid for the facilities have been paid for other grants. That's where I get skeptical but I still say we should treat Mother Earth as our mother with respect do the things that we need to do as a human race together. Pull out some of the technology that has already been created Tesla lots and lots of inventors have already created technology that would have ants us so much farther than what we are what car gets 50 15 20 25 miles to a gallon why when are has been inventions that the government has stolen locked away decades vehicle should get a hundred miles or more on a gallon of gas

  14. BadHombre

    August 11, 2019 at 12:37 am

    deGrASSe is an idiot.

  15. Andrew Cliffe

    August 11, 2019 at 12:51 pm

    The press and politicians are owned.
    Truth is dead.
    Long live stupidity.

  16. Hello There

    August 11, 2019 at 10:35 pm

    When I see the super wealthy change their ways, I will change mine. Until then, I don't believe the hype. They have more access to the truth than I do and I still see them polluting the world more in 1 week than I do in 10 years.

  17. Smash Mean

    August 12, 2019 at 12:07 am

    Listen to these fucking shills.

  18. Kitten Bo

    August 12, 2019 at 6:35 pm

    How did Abe Lincoln sign anything into law in 1963?

  19. Lindsey Corum

    August 13, 2019 at 12:00 am

    Neil deGrasse Tyson, snake oil salesman. I can't stand the arrogant sob, if you don't agree with him then you're an idiot and should remain silent.

  20. Real Truth

    August 13, 2019 at 1:48 pm

    Climate change is result of Chemtrails, Freemasonry building NWO.

  21. Klarkster

    August 13, 2019 at 6:07 pm

    A post-truth world is actually a thing, I have been told.

  22. zongora123

    August 13, 2019 at 6:35 pm

    How strange that when it comes to 5G radiation, noone is listening the scientists or reading the numerous reports over tests carried out since the cold war …. about CO2 emmission, the trouble is that electric cars, alternative energy productions (since all based on the use of battery) are creating more pollution than CO2 emmissions made by cars … etc

  23. Bill W

    August 14, 2019 at 12:40 am

    Truth ssndwich… Tony has a whole menu to choose from…go check them out….

  24. Rook Worx

    August 14, 2019 at 7:02 am

    the interview that NIel deGrasse made himself sound like a highschool science teacher……

  25. Kim Hjortsbjerg

    August 14, 2019 at 1:08 pm

    War on science is a huge driver for Nasa to claim that humans are becoming bigheaded destroyers of the earth ! I wish the same for you ! I am not against the human race , maybe you are !

  26. sweiland75

    August 14, 2019 at 6:27 pm

    It's not just a liberal or conservative bias. It's an ignorance bias.

  27. William Ramos

    August 15, 2019 at 2:29 am

    hmm, sound like Andrew Yang said we are 10 years too late.

  28. Islamisthecultofsin

    August 15, 2019 at 2:58 am

    They altered the data to show that the world is warming. This is not science. It's propaganda.

  29. Brian 716

    August 15, 2019 at 5:17 pm

    Climate change models have been just as accurate as flat earth models. Wonder why anyone would be skeptical about the history of earths climate thats only been recorded for a tiny percent of its existence!

  30. BIG D

    August 16, 2019 at 12:26 am

    every so often people have said the worlds going to end!!! Today that group is climate change people. I wonder what the comet is going to destroy the world people think?

  31. George Hong

    August 18, 2019 at 5:30 am

    Tyson mixes up weather and climate. When you measure climate you are looking at changes per decade not this year compared to last year.

  32. Fp Pro

    August 18, 2019 at 5:27 pm

    Ironically, he's right. That exactly what happens when people other then scientists write conclusions…like the IPCC…or the CRU.

  33. gray man

    August 18, 2019 at 6:43 pm

    talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
    neil degrasse tyson cherry picks 100% of the time.

  34. Ecorveontee Baylis

    August 19, 2019 at 4:50 am

    Crazy thing is that we were making movies about technology and events that we would have and that would happen waaaay before we had them or they happen. I mean there were 10,000 year old drawings of machines in caves! Personally I’d rather take precautions because in the end it’s for our wellbeing and safety.

  35. arawis

    August 19, 2019 at 11:01 pm

    why is no one telling me what percentage of global warming is due to human activity ?

  36. Econoclast 101

    August 20, 2019 at 9:50 am

    Yep, lots of hurricane “deniers” out there too. All those scientists dreaming up socialist, commie things like weather reports!

  37. Johnny Shabazz

    August 20, 2019 at 7:15 pm

    And, if the oil industry, the Koch Brothers, a scientific institution or investigative journalist could indisputably proven human-induced climate change was just a massive hoax, they would've succeeded by now. It would by far be the bigger, more headline-catching story of the century. But that just hasn't happened.

  38. The One and Only

    August 20, 2019 at 9:59 pm

    Scientific theory is just that THEORY. The ones bringing in politics and making this a religion are the far left environmentalists and climate entrepreneurs like Al Gore. In fact they even make predictions as to when the end will happen, just like the Christians who predict armageddon.

  39. Joseph Upton

    August 20, 2019 at 10:37 pm

    Science is not done by "consensus". Tyson should know that. There is big grant money for scientists who toe the "alarmist" line. But very little money for those who disagree.

  40. derdagian1

    August 21, 2019 at 11:39 am

    My CO2 won’t hold heat down here at night.

    I defy ALL!

  41. Crazy Cat

    August 21, 2019 at 7:55 pm

    Was anybody prosecuted for climategate when the "scientists" manipulated data to bolster their argument.

  42. Rob bel

    August 22, 2019 at 4:51 am

    Neil, Lincoln was not alive in 1963 to sign into law anything.

  43. Rob bel

    August 22, 2019 at 4:55 am

    What a joke. DeGrasse does not want you to cherry pick science and he does exactly the same. There were much worse hurricanes and terrible weather conditions before and they were blamed on God and punishments for sin, now we call it first global warming then lately climate change.

  44. Władca Wymiaru

    August 22, 2019 at 9:15 pm

    Science is ALWAYS about questioning. Saying ”the science is settled” and ”scientific consensus” is sign of stupidity not real progress!!!

  45. Joseph Figliuolo

    August 23, 2019 at 12:09 am

    Diesel gate was never about carbon.

  46. Joseph Figliuolo

    August 23, 2019 at 12:11 am

    Enhanced greenhouse effect is all about the human influence on top of all the other natural climate cycles.

  47. Spencer Justensen

    August 23, 2019 at 2:40 am

    We are missing the point on what we need to learn from these events.

  48. chris t

    August 23, 2019 at 4:43 am

    This has nothing to do with cultural political or economic philosophies and everything to do with the fact that you've been selling us this same garbage for the last 40-plus years and have yet to be able to get it right…
    When I was a kid in the late 70s and early 80s it was global cooling.
    Then later it's become global warming and now because you guys still can't get your metrics right you've changed it to climate change
    The simple fact is there are no let me repeat that there are no such thing as a consensus in science you yourself mr. Tyson have said the exact same thing.
    The only one I see here playing a political game is you bad science is bad science and the fact that multiple Global Science experts in the area of climate and weather including the founder of The Weather Channel has called b***** on your false claims I would stay stick to the Stars

  49. الجنوبي

    August 23, 2019 at 4:43 pm

    In the middle east there are some people who believe that the scientific community mostly consists of ignorants and conspirators.

  50. Croakyguy

    August 23, 2019 at 8:00 pm

    Doesn't give a Sh1t about school shootings, ndgt is a joke.

  51. Truth Seaker

    August 24, 2019 at 7:47 am

    Carbon dioxide in the Atmosphere is 0.004% composition of the atmosphere, human contribution to that is 4%. Carbon dioxide is the single most important "Plant" nutrient on the Planet. Carbon Dioxide levels have traditionally been far higher in the past infact for most of earths history since life started here and if tCO2 levels were to fall much lower plant life would start to die. Tyson is full of shit.

  52. Peter Löfqvist

    August 24, 2019 at 2:12 pm

    Abraham Lincoln signed into law 1963?

  53. English Training

    August 24, 2019 at 3:08 pm

    Always slamming religion when if anything the Catholic church and the Pope are leaders on saving God's green earth.

  54. Slartibartfast

    August 24, 2019 at 5:59 pm

    deGrasse Tyson is being political here – in science if there is one finding that contradicts your hypothesis you go after that finding and do your best to prove it wrong.
    Much of science is about statistical analysis and the null hypothesis, meaning that if you have a low P value you have a pretty good chance that your hypothesis is correct(the higher the P value the more chance that your null hypothesis is correct).
    So the problem with Tyson talking about people "cherry picking" papers is that if one of those "cherry picked" papers is correct – there a good chance that there is a hole in the other 1000 or so acceptable-to-Tyson papers.

  55. Maggie Lou

    August 24, 2019 at 11:01 pm

    Enough TOP scientists debunk the lies of this comedy show. It's a political scam & monitised to fund charlatans to distract us from the REAL dangers facing western nations.

  56. Henk van der Laak

    August 25, 2019 at 2:32 pm

    Tyson makes one essential mistake. Climate Change is not science, it's a religion.

  57. ikm64

    August 25, 2019 at 4:38 pm

    OK, I've got a question…a simple question…and yet one I expect you won't hear from either side of the debate…
    When…exactly…was the last time the climate didn't change…
    Now if you feel you can't adapt to the latest 'climate' change…don't you think a better question would be…
    How can 'I' adapt to the 'change'?

  58. danny moon

    August 25, 2019 at 8:22 pm

    It’s funny but how the countries with Nationalised energy infrastructure tend to challenge the ‘science’. ( ie. Those without billions driving a feeding frenzy of privatised ‘green’ energy companies, renewable subsidies, research grants , & lucrative green lobby NGOs , Etc etc )

  59. Gregg Goodnight

    August 25, 2019 at 8:52 pm

    This is embarrassing. Climate alarmism is based primarily on deeply flawed models that intentionally ignore any natural climatic impacts such as the sun and ocean cycles. Observing that these models have been in error by a magnitude of 2x to 4x is not denying science, but looking at the evidence in front of your eyes. A real scientist expresses caution about his conclusions. A propagandist is never wrong. Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.

  60. Andrew Clarke

    August 25, 2019 at 10:16 pm

    So climate skeptics are influenced by their prejudices but not climate disaster-mongers?

  61. dan danials

    August 26, 2019 at 11:52 am

    so how are any of you going to force people like be to change?? I never recycle, i throw stays and plastic into the ocean, i pour oil and greese down the drain.. i dont give a fuck about what happens AFTER im dead…

  62. Bill Tipton

    August 26, 2019 at 7:30 pm

    That's epic considering supporters cherry pick as well. And even more importantly any studies that are put forth to support the deniers are denied funding. Soooooo where does that leave us? I am not saying I support either side with that statement I'm just asking that you think about it

  63. Andrew S

    August 27, 2019 at 12:01 pm

    So, we cannot relocate a city, but we can modify Earth's. Gimme a break please 🙄.

  64. dandelion eater

    August 28, 2019 at 1:40 am

    All climate change deniers are conveniently paid off by oil companies…change my mind

  65. dandelion eater

    August 28, 2019 at 1:43 am

    “Facts don’t care about your feelings” says the party that denies science and accepts man in the sky who is completely based on feelings and no facts 👏🏻😤🤷‍♀️👌🏻

  66. Tim McGrath

    August 28, 2019 at 1:05 pm

    The only problem is that many “actual” climate scientists don’t believe that CO2 causes climate change. But of course that’s because of their political views 🙄

  67. ReallyUnexplainable

    August 28, 2019 at 11:08 pm

    I actually find hard to see people who deny that climate change exist, and even that it's in part due to human acivity. What they want to know, usually, is to what extent it is due to human activity, or not. Because if I invite someone in my house, and the house starts to go to shit, I want to make sure it's them that are making a mess before scolding the fuck out of them. The problem is that a legitimate question gets responded to with a vague answer. He still hasn't given a clean cut answer, he just said something on the lines "What else could it possibly be?".

  68. Havoc

    August 31, 2019 at 1:07 am

    Resuming the science behind Global Warming:

    I've never seen this, it must be the end of the world.

    Those underdeveloped countries must be stopped.

    Humans are viruses, you must stop having babies.

    It's true and you should believe it or you'll die.

    That's how you revert the 10% to 90% and 90% to 10%.

  69. Javier Perwz

    August 31, 2019 at 4:23 am

    So what can’t the 97 percent that agree on this shit get it right? Florida was supposed to be under water years ago. What happened to the ozone layer killer? These are the same scientist that say boys are girls and girls are boys.

  70. katie duffy

    August 31, 2019 at 10:56 pm

    Oh dear, the 97% of scientists who agréé that the climate is gonna keep kill us all very soon all know if they don't agree to the consensus that we are killing the climate they will get sacked,threatened and bullied….the 3% who question the veracity of the research findings into climate change have experienced just that…the coral reef expert Dr Ridd, just won a court case after being sacked from the university he worked at for 40yrs because he disagreed the coral reef is dying & refused to be silenced. Neil hasn't a clue what he is talking about.

  71. katie duffy

    August 31, 2019 at 11:06 pm

    And i wish the climate moogals would stop talking about CO2 like it's a fatal virus….without there is no life….getting rid of it like I keep hearing would be the end of us…..
    I do agree however that we need to use clean fuel for transport…..not because I think it's causing climate change,but because it's causing Asthma, and other nasty illnesses…..the concentration of pollution from cars & trucks in towns & cities is pouring over pedestrians,especially babies and small kids.

  72. ohmusicsweetmusic

    August 31, 2019 at 11:55 pm

    what a douche!

  73. Individual Perspective *IP*

    September 1, 2019 at 8:22 pm

    Oh the irony of a complete fraud that is NDgT

  74. woodyfive0

    September 2, 2019 at 3:58 pm

    Skeptics are there because science has been wrong or blown things up bigger than they are (I am not saying they are wrong here) I remember in the 80’s acid rain was huge and we were all gonna die, I am still here and hear nothing about acid rain anymore. When Fukushima happened, David Suzuki claimed the Northern Hemisphere was going to need to evacuate, which obviously never happened. And yes of course using these things to forward someones agenda. Do we need to changes our ways? Absolutely but there are reasons to question even people as famous as David Suzuki

  75. Joe W

    September 2, 2019 at 7:20 pm

    Many Scientists have debunked human induced climate change. Obama just bought a multi million dollar beachside mansion…….perhaps he doesn't believe in sea level rise?

  76. samdee pride

    September 2, 2019 at 7:47 pm

    climate change is a hoax

  77. Dean Larson

    September 3, 2019 at 11:33 pm

    "Settled"? By whom? (known liars) "cherry pick"?? As the warmists did when choosing 8,547 authors out of 29,083 to side with them…of which only 1,189 (4%) responded…from which they deduced their "97% of scientists agree!!"? (TRUTH: "97% of the 4% who agreed, agree." ( a known lie which the warmists have been bandying about for 10 years….because it's all they've got)
    Climate change hoax collapses as Michael Mann’s bogus “hockey stick” graph defamation lawsuit dismissed by the Supreme Court of British Columbia (Natural News):
    "Michael Mann [infamous hockey-stick graph]didn’t like being called a fraud by his critics, so he sued them for defamation. And late last week, one of those lawsuits was concluded by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, which threw out Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball."  (Ball said Mann "should be in the state pen, not Penn State")

    "This court decision reportedly stemmed from the fact that Michael Mann refused to turn over “R2 regression numbers” to the court, which would have revealed the data manipulations that led to the rigging of the hockey stick graph."
    " Many hundreds of peer-reviewed papers cite Mann’s work, which is now effectively junked. Despite having deep-pocketed backers willing and able to feed his ego as a publicity-seeking mouthpiece against skeptics, Mann’s credibility as a champion of environmentalism is in tatters. But it gets worse for the litigious Penn State professor. Close behind Dr Ball is celebrated writer Mark Steyn. Steyn also defends himself against another one of Mann’s SLAPP suits – this time in Washington DC. Steyn boldly claims Mann “has perverted the norms of science on an industrial scale.” Esteemed American climate scientist, Dr Judith Curry, has submitted to the court an Amicus Curiae legal brief exposing Mann. The world can now see that his six-year legal gambit to silence his most effective critics and chill scientific debate has spectacularly backfired."
    (Search the headline for full article)
    We are coming out of the "Little Ice Age" (1300-1875) (1880 is always the baseline of warmists' temperature line graphs).  So we had better be warming!!  (earth is just returning to 'normal' / what do they find under melting glaciers?  trees.)

  78. Perrin Aus

    September 4, 2019 at 4:27 am


  79. Doctor Reno

    September 4, 2019 at 11:52 am

    Just had to click on this to see what a man with an IQ in the basement and who talks like a 3rd Grader had to say on this topic…no one was surprised. He's still a moron.

  80. m forest

    September 5, 2019 at 1:52 am

    Tyson = Sexual harasser.

  81. Ron Carney

    September 5, 2019 at 6:59 am

    Tyson is high on the list to be published when this egregious CO2 fraud is finally exposed. He has no background in climatology and his only positive is that he is not as stupid as Bill Nye!

  82. jmroxx1

    September 5, 2019 at 8:42 am

  83. Tony Colon

    September 5, 2019 at 2:10 pm

    I knew Abraham was still alive in 1963!!!!! I knew it…. I knew it… I knew it!! 😂😂😂😂

  84. doobiewah357

    September 5, 2019 at 11:57 pm

    When Neil's not sexually assaulting women, he's spreading fear about the end of the Earth. What a guy ! lol

  85. Ducati Testeratta

    September 6, 2019 at 3:48 am

    I though Tyson might have some wisdom to add to the AGW debate but he's just as duped as the rest of them. Science is never based on consensus. It's based on test and theory.

  86. chatbear69

    September 6, 2019 at 9:15 am

    I have no issue that things are changing with the climate. But we can not rely on the science of it solely. Scientist are funded by companies that have the final say on that paper. That given information can and usually does change to benefit the company and give them the advantage. There should be no private funding for information that impacts the world as a whole. This type of information should be funded by the people without influence from political, media or government interference and should be made available to the open public without bias. Maybe a new type of GoFundMe for the sciences where the people pick the type of science they want by majority vote. Just a thought …

  87. DMR1826

    September 6, 2019 at 10:31 am

    proves how dumb people are Neil God has changed weather to save the world from over population, they dont get that when they save lives , they only hurt themselves so storms and more is coming, heat storms etc…

  88. Neil Lynch

    September 6, 2019 at 11:07 am

    Money is the root of all science 'denial'.

  89. richard black

    September 6, 2019 at 7:34 pm


  90. Javier Ruiz

    September 6, 2019 at 9:10 pm

    Tyson he is a lier

  91. Javier Ruiz

    September 6, 2019 at 9:11 pm

    Neil deGrasse Tyson idiot

  92. Lady of AMERICA

    September 7, 2019 at 2:37 am

    Neil deGrasse Tyson doesn’t know what he is talking about. He is totally a junk scientist. Notice how he’s talking about governmental policies, foolishness over a hurricane, as if it was something out of the ordinary, and like AOC “ we must act now, before it’s too late “. He sounds like he’s on the payroll
    , of course he is, he’s trying to sell his damn book! There is huge money in climate change, global warming governance. The UN will do and has done every trick and fudged report and been caught lying cheating and falsely presenting marked up data. These so called scientists, who he is talking about feed off each other’s papers, write reports based on each other’s projections. They are all projections of what might happen but are lying when they say it did happen or is happening now. The data to an expert is junk rubbish . I’ll give you one fact right now, there are so many Polar Bears in the Arctic right now that they are infringing on the lives of other species in the region and might cause these poor species to die off. They make it fit to their needs and their needs are lots and lots of money. Governmental Climate Change fruit cakes have every Left ding bat believe that there are no more polar bears. Ask any Alaskan about that.

  93. Nathan Teske

    September 7, 2019 at 5:47 am

    What CNN put in the quote bar is not directly what Tyson said

  94. try-much harder

    September 7, 2019 at 3:32 pm

    signed into law "1863" Neil, which only goes to show that even people like us make mistakes!

  95. Abdulla A2000

    September 7, 2019 at 5:31 pm

    Neil deGrasse Tyson explains things so brilliantly yet so simple even a simple person gets it

  96. amoskowitz0103

    September 7, 2019 at 7:55 pm

    Neil deGrasse Tyson is a distinguished physicist? Now THAT'S funny. That's like calling Bugs Bunny a distinguished actor.

  97. Michael Suder

    September 7, 2019 at 11:20 pm

    I could listen to Neil all day

  98. Boney M

    September 8, 2019 at 7:58 am

    There are really only about ten or twelve climate scientists that make there media rounds. All funded by apiac. And all the statistical data to "prove" climate change is totally cherry picked. This is not hard to research for yourself.

  99. Jimmy D

    September 9, 2019 at 8:38 pm

    I dont doubt "Climate Change" exists, I doubt what it causing it. The climate has been changing since before man has put one molecule of CO2 in the air, so how did the temperature rise before we had the Industrial Revolution? We should cut our emissions of course but dont cut your nose off to spite your face!!

  100. Lou Bisignani

    September 9, 2019 at 11:26 pm

    I believe that the sea is rising and will continue to rise no matter how many wind mills we erect. The land and cities along the coasts will be lost soon apparently and the cost will be in the trillions. So, why do we see nothing being done physically, as they did and continue to do in countries like Holland, where they took land back from the sea hundreds of years ago, without the massive trucks, cranes,and bulldozers we have today? Look at the lower edge of Manhattan. The stock market buildings are only a small portion of what will be lost if nothing is done. Again, trillions of dollars of value are in danger unless we start doing something. So when do we start ?

Leave a Reply