Heartland Naomi is definitely improving and honing her message but still has way to go. Please practice her more before throwing her to the hungry press. Stay strong Naomi! The truth will out!
Home Brew Yes she got ambushed And she held it together well on national tv Needs to be more fluid. Turn the question away from denial of warming and to supporting scientific exploration The alarm is coming from politics, not science
This was so silly. An untrained nineteen year old girl is in no way qualified to overturn scientific findings via Google searches on her i phone. Of course, everyone is free to question whatever they wish but the opinions of laypeople don't and shouldn't carry the same weight as the consensus of the world's experts on the subject. The world's population of scientists that study this are the experts and expertise matters. I'm not picking on Naomi here either (although I should as misguided as she sounds), all of these criteria also equally apply to Greta. Heartland representing the issue of climate change as nothing more than a spat between teenage girls by pitting them against each other in a separate video (Titled "whom should we trust") is a transparently desperate attempt at marginalizing the scientific issue that climate change really is - and a pathetic one at that.
Jason M You’re misunderstanding her role. It’s not to represents the SCIENTISTS finding non alarmist fluctuating climate but rather her PEERS, to quell alarmism and to promote scientific study
Exaclty, if this isn't evidence that so many people are just blind nutjobs, endlessly spewing alarmists BS then I don't know what is. The man clearly doesn't know what is coming out of his own mouth. If you can't slow down and carefully consider what you say, then you shouldn't be part of the conversation.... ....you shouldn't be "taken seriously in this debate".... ....."it's just a fact".
Piers can't even bully this girl, I love that finally a erudite and educated voice of reason amidst all this chose. Adults have been abusing children too long in this fraud of all time x
Bob A LOL! No Bob, you misunderstood me. All I did was QUOTE Bugs, whose quotation does a wonderful job of describing Morgan. Obviously Bugs is far more intelligent than Morgan! 😜
Tom Javman My mistake that I misread your wonderful comment. Still happy I stood up for bugs because of his superior intelligence. Again my apology 👍😁🙏🇺🇸
It’s only heating up if you believe the temperature that was altered by Prof Mann to erase the warming periods of the past to make it appear that we are seeing significant warming now. It shows that Morgan knows nothing, absolutely nothing, about the science. Disappointed by Morgan. Usually a fan but he got this wrong.
Yes his argument went from "warming at a dangerous rate" to any warming at all. But in fairness, Naomi also misquoted him, she changed "warming at a dangerous rate" to "catastrophic warming". She then goes on to falsely claim the science touted by the IPCC is based on computer models. So both were wrong to varying degrees but she was more wrong than Piers. At least he apologized when he realized his error. Yet another loss for the denial set.
Jason M ... the projections are based on computer models based on the supposed science of CO2 being the control knob of the global temp and those models are all over the place. The IPCC takes an average....an average of many wrong projections does not make a correct one. Dangerous or catastrophic?....semantics. It’s easy to misquote when sceptics hear both of those words being used regularly. Besides...Piers misquoted himself, not someone else. Another loss for the alarmists
@@antiprogpragmatist9350 Incorrect. The "supposed science" the models utilize are otherwise known as *physical laws* to the scientifically literate. All apolgies if the laws of physics are at odds with your political views. Furthermore, output from global ensemble mean projections are in very good agreement with observations. berkeleyearth.org/global-temperatures-2017/ Secondly, Naomi was the one who used the term "catastrophic" not Piers. Whereas they both used the term "dangerous" (Naomi agreed to it tacitly) she was the one who changed "dangerous" to "catastrophic." For those of us who understand the English language, we know that 'catastrophe' denotes greater severity than 'danger.' While anything catastrophic is dangerous, not everything dangerous is catastrophic. Given that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I like the way you concluded your response. Very stylish. Swing...and a miss.
Jason M ...I know the word she used...little difference. Piers should have picked up on it right away when challenged as well as his cohost which was what my original post was about....right? I’m not going to get into a pissing war with an alarmist. If you’re so brainwashed to believe that the average from about one hundred wide ranging models somehow gives accurate global warming projections....good luck with that...because I couldn’t possibly care less what you believe
I watched this interview this morning during breakfast and felt that there was a clear bias in favour of the climate alarmist. Naomi Seibt wasnt allowed to get her point across. They immediately followed the interview with the weather girl taking everyone through a chart explaining how humans are definitely responsible for climate change, ignoring a comment from Piers Morgan that the climate has constantly changed over thousands of years. I feel bad for Naomi, who had to sit through the weather girls presentation without being given the oppurtunity to comment, but hopefully this kind of thing will only make her stronger in her search for truth via facts.
The English girl was allowed to speak uninterrupted but the German girl was hectored and insulted (he implied she was a publicity seeker). Never seen Thurnberg face that kind of questioning.
@@Cspacecat copying and pasting someones theory doesnt necessarily result in your passing on facts. Everyone needs to discuss this, it needs to be debated, not simply accepting it as it was approved by the Rothschilds. There are as many scientists who dispute this as there are who (are no doubt paid to) promote it. Let them discuss. Let Naomi have a voice. The climate alarmists will not sit with those who disagree and discuss the situation, and that needs to be addressed.
Naomi is great she is intelligent, smart and has the better ideas on her side...greetings from germany...hope you are doing well in GB without the EU...SOLIDARITY WITH GREEK WHILE DEFENDING OUR BOARDERS😷
True, Erin. But Anthony, it's actually worse than that, as it is the deliberate misrepresentation of the global temperature statistics, trends, and number of scientists agreeing...in order to make the data appear to be dangerous. Research "climategate"...as it is really just the new world order's agenda 21 being enacted.
@@faith4today I believe this old virus with a new name is part of that same agenda. They did the same thing to the death stats in Italy. There are 60 million people and Italy has the highest elderly population in Europe. The media said "800 People died in one day in Italy!" ... Well the death statistics for Italy are 640,400 people die every year in Italy. That's an average of 1754 people a day. So 800 people who were elderly probably would have died from any flu and still would have been a good day in Italy at almost half the normal deaths. Kids by the hundreds of thousands went to the beaches in Florida for Spring Break.. and yet it didn't affect the "Pandemic" numbers what so ever? Something is a miss here.. We're being lied and manipulated and it's destroying America's economy. Which is part of Agenda 21.
@Anthony I cannot say your wrong, as it may very well be that that is the case...but I trust their plan will fail...as I don't believe it is yet time for America's fall.
I agree with Piers Morgan on a number of issues but he can massive prick when someone disagrees with ideological view of the world. That was an incredibly disrespectful hack job of an interview. There are less straw men in a scarecrow factory. You handled yourself professionally Naomi and the thinking rational people of this world see right through this garbage and are behind you 100%.
@@CspacecatAGW is actually quite simple. Without a high positive feedback from water vapor/clouds , CO2 increases from burning fossil fuels cannot cause catastrophic omg we're all gonna die global warming. This high postive feedback value is not known and is a guess. It is assumed to be high because for CO2 to be the primary driver of climate (another guess) it has to be high. The climate models do not and cannot model water vapor/clouds accurately so the positive forcing value for increased water vapor from increased CO2 is guessed and entered into the climate models manually. If you read the IPCC reports they say they cannot model water vapor/clouds accurately. I believe the exact words are "remains challenging" The end result of this is a guessed high climate sensitivity which caused predicted levels of warming made 30 years ago to be far above what actually happened. This discrepancy is the difference between hysterical alarmism and rational scientific debate and discovery of how the climate functions as a whole. Simply assuming there is high positive feedback because it is assumed CO2 is driving the climate is not science. Using deeply flawed incomplete model outputs based on flawed and incomplete inputs as evidence is also not science. Refusing to debate or discuss challenges to a hypothesis is not science. Labeling people who are skeptical of bold unsubstantiated claims as "deniers" is not science. Starting with a conclusion and filtering out that which contradicts that conclusion is not science. Claiming that the science behind AGW is settled is not science. Claiming science is a democracy is not science.
It's a sad thing when a very polite 17 year old is taken advantage of for her politeness; because of the rudeness of an adult. She would have been better off being an interrupting asshole like Piers.
EF M -Typical response of a moron and actually she did, you just weren't listening. Also where did she have the time to explain, being interrupted constantly? Try watching other videos with her to get more on her knowledge on the subject. Plus if you actually believe climate change is real or more specifically dangerous, try listening to other experts in the field, such as the originator of the Weather Network who states unequivocally Global warming is a natural cycle, proven and shown scientifically.
@EF M -Why is it you climate morons like to spew alot of crap, do you think copying and pasting an article will defend your idiocy? You are falling for a hoax, a lie, and obviously listening only to what the globalist 'establishment' wants you to hear, MSM not excluded. CO2 makes up less then 1.0% of the greenhouse and in reality has been at its lowest level in centuries, just recently seeing a slight upturn, which is good and can be witnessed by the increased forest growth world-wide. The actual experts in the field, with many studies behind them, suggest that CO2 levels are not in any way raising the earth's temperature and also the temperature has only gone up very slightly in the past 100 years, most likely due to radiation from the sun. Piers and the rest lie through their teeth about study results claiming 2000 scientists agree>Total BS. Fact is in of the 20 odd studies accumulated in the overall study world-wide, the Russian study seems to be by consensus the most accurate and it does not show an issue with global warming anywhere outside the historical norms. The planet has been going through climate cycles as far back as we can study, we just happen to be in one of the fairest luckily. Don't take my word for what I have asserted here do more research on the topic and you'll see how wrong you are.
The truly smart people usually remain in hiding as they're exhausted by people who aren't receptive to actual advanced reasoning as people are too prideful to admit their lack of info/flaws
Maga 2020 Baby Says the guy with a vernacular of a neanderthal and who believes in a mythical entity that created women from the rib of a man. You also relate to scientists being stupid for not believing in an imaginary person in the sky and believing in Bigfoot haha, that’s so misinformed and outright ridiculous. Scientists come to conclusions based off empirical evidence and repeatable experiments that show predictable results, you and other religious fanatics believe (which is defined as thinking of something as true with no evidence to back it) in an entity in the sky because simple people 2000 years ago told you so in a book. Haha Again, congratulations ‘duh, fuck stick, uh duh... I done did insulted you with swear words, duh’ haha Fucking simpleton.
Maga 2020 Baby Wow, your stupidity really shines. Not once did I mention anything to you about my views on climate change, yet you’re so Dunning Krueger that you felt the urge to attack me on that, using your ultimate wisdom of knowing everything (including about me). To attack someone without prior knowledge to their stance on a subject just goes to show a simple minded person with no real perception, especially in an argumentative manner, just shows immaturity. Now, like I said in regards to scientists; science is the only way of knowing objective truth as it’s the only form of study that relies on what I stated above. Now, obviously there’s corruption in all facets of life and not everyone can be trusted. In regards to climate change, it’s a real thing! The climate changes, it’s been shown that the Earth experiences periods of warm and periods of cold climates and it shifts over a long period of time. Many factors contribute to the change of climate and Carbon dioxide levels is one of them. So yeah, humans polluting the air with high levels of carbon dioxide will have an impact on the climate. Now, to say to what extent can’t be said or proven either way as we don’t live in the future. My stance on climate change is neither misinformed or extreme in any way, and it’s calculated and thought through logically on basis of data presented over a smorgasbord of scientific study. Now, if you’re going to write off scientists as being moronic shills, you have to remember that your counter argument that climate change is bullshit (or whatever you actually think about it) comes from scientific studies carried out by scientists as well. So you’re contradicting your own argumentative points to support your opinion. Again, you assume that I just believe (belief is the lack of intelligence due to it being defined as thinking of something as true without any evidence to back it, pointing this out to draw the striking comparisons between science and religion) scientists because of a title of ‘scientist’. Science is the study of nature and again, relies on predictable results from experiments and empirical evidence. Now, like I said, people in all facets can be corrupt. That said, at least with any scientific paper published, it can be peer reviewed by anyone who knows that topic or study through and through, or anyone willing to learn then replicate the experiment to see for themselves. You don’t have this in any religious cult out there, all rules a set in stone and you have to subjectively believe or you’ll be sent to fiery hell to burn haha madness. So no, you believing in God is not the same as me relying more on the scientific world for facts of nature through evidence proving study. I don’t know what crazy west borough church site you’re reading but no, scientists haven’t relied on Bigfoot being the ‘missing link’ as that’s preposterous, no evolutionary biologist is out there thinking ‘Bigfoot , I know it’s a myth but maybe, just maybe, this made up creature is the missing link’. So furthermore, you’ve proven to be the stupidest person on the internet today, especially paired with your ill informed attempts at outsmarting people with your contradictions and your mythical creatures and entities. and Again, congratulations.
Don't like the man but it's very likely he was not "lying". Why would he do that when his comments are a matter of record? He just overlooked the fact that he had used that term to describe warming and corrected it when it was pointed out to him. We all make mistakes, does not make us liars. Calm down.
Yeah, it's a joke , she is obviously well to do, with nothing to do, what I call a snobby fukin cow, a clueless one at that , she has all the latest hi tek gear from Asia and I bet a big fuk off TV in her room , yes from Asia, bet daddy bought her a 2 lts sports car as well, pathetic
She did say that she buys locally produced food which is a VERY good thing for supporting local farmers and local economy while reducing POLLUTION which is the REAL THREAT not cLiMaTe ChAnGe.
@@stuzo666 are you even listening to what she said or are you incapable of doing so if you're expecting the person might say sth you won't agree with? she literally said the exact opposite of all that stuff you're accusing her of so for the sake of mankind I hope you're a bot bc if you're not you and to some extend we all are in trouble :D
@@MassaManUtdChannel your a typical leftie, this 17 upper crust sorry ass excuse for a human is a fukin hypocrite , she has all the mod cons from China, the biggest polluter, ohhhhhh but thats ok isn't it, do as I say not as I do???? She like , mental Greta, are just doing all this shit to line their mummy and daddy's pockets, it will keep the bentleys ticking over and the duck pond in tact and keep little sophie and nigel at grammar school, a frickin joke
Piers Morgan has some talents but none were evident in this interview with Naomi Seibt. Two seasoned 'professionals' bullying the young girl rather than letting her say her bit. What a pity and what complete numpties!
Piers Morgan has failed all the way here. Naomi Seibt owned him from A to Z. Also, he should be ashamed not letting talking a young 19 YO girl when he asks her questions. Intimidation and rudeness will not impress his audience.
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology: GMB: Piers Morgan corrects himself and apologises to guest 08:47, Wed, Mar 4, 2020 www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
@@ant7936 You are right, it is not a real apology. I should have mentioned that. It's an "ifpology". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology#Ifpology
piers morgan asked: "Is it DANGEROUSLY warming" the answer is NO. Naomi answered correctly and piers the manipulative LIAR spun his words around like a duplicitous serpent.
“We’re the most consumptive planet” so piers what other planet are you comparing us too 🤔😂 And whoever the female reporter is showed a great deal of independ reporting. Not. The whole time the English girl was talking she was disagreeing with piers questioning and nodding her head every time she spoke. When the German girl spoke the reporter just shook her head and spoke over her. Virtue signaling is why msm viewership is continuing to drop. Btw. #biggestclickbaitthisweek
@@LordBransty do you have a link explaining that? How much did they give it compared to the amount of money they gave Exxon? It seems a lot of the time they give tiny amounts of money to those causes to try and hide how much they’re giving to companies like ExxonMobil. I’m not looking for a fight as to whether it’s try or false though I actually am interested.
@@jumble-1238 - Sorry Jenny, but I don't. I'd probably read something about it 2 years ago when I posted it. However, If you go onto the oil companies websites, they're all for net zero. Plenty of promotions regarding cutting emissions. I'm sure if they were against it, you'd never hear a thing about climate change.
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology: www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
Ah yes, the typical and manipulative, “So what you’re saying is...” interview bullying tactics designed to put words in people’s mouths to try and back them into a corner. I’m glad Naomi held her composure and responded calmly and clearly on all her points. I was hoping she would say something on the lines of: “Mr. Morgan, I would appreciate it if you would not try to speak for me based upon your own assumptions and the narrative you’re paid to promote and protect. Please also remain silent and DO NOT interrupt me while I’m talking and I shall respectfully do the same for you.... Now, as I was explaining...”
How much energy is needed to warm the oceans and the landmass. If you compare that with the energy that we as humans use and or the feedback loop with the CO2. It is so egomaniac to think we (the humans) are warming the planet.
It is mind boggling that the public founded organizations like IPCC, NASA would spread false information about climate change. They literal modified the historic data to make appear that temperature is going up sharply.
@ Sean Leith - spot on Prof Michael Man and his ‘hockey stick’ is the one responsible. His fake temperature graph is used by the TV guy come so-called professor Brian Cox and David and his falling walruses Attenborough, in their videos as proof that the temperature is warming. You can’t make this up. But they did!!
Has he apologised? He didn't in this interview. He should have though as he incorrectly stated that 2000 scientists think the planet is heating up to a dangerous level (whatever 'dangerous level' actually means?)- unless this is something i'm unaware of. Then he criticised Naomi for saying she was contradicting herself when it was him who changed to talking just about warming and leaving out the 'dangerous level'. Naomi's great - and she'll be even better in the future when she gets used to being interviewed - if you ask people like Morgan to quote his sources he likely wouldn't have a clue.
Yes he has apologised, but not for his BS about the 2000 scientists, just for that second thing you mention. This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology: www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
I heard no apology for Piers lie about 2000 so called scientists (I will go with 31000 real scientists who think we need not panic and destroy our nations in the Western world).
"Do you believe the planet is heating up at a DANGEROUS RATE?" vs "Do you believe the planet is heating up?" Those are two very different questions. Naomi held her own against Piers's bit of bullying.
This one is right up there with the Tommy Robinson interview. Whatever anyone thinks of Naomi or Tommy, freedom of speech has to come first and to treat it with the utter contempt that Piers and the rest of the msm continue to peddle will only continue to see people seeking their news elsewhere and only watching the msm for comedy entertainment at best.
@@homebrew332 It's not clickbait. The title clearly says the interview that caused him to apologize. That doesn't imply that the apology would be part of the video.
mkygod obviously I wasn’t the only one that read the title quickly that seemed that. Why wasn’t it titled piers talks to young lady like crap and lies to her about his question ? 😂 but you are correct
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology: www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
Piers Morgan is ignorant and always asking questions and interrupts when them questions are being answered my mother always told not to interrupt when someone is talking .
The girl from Germany more intelligent than the rest of em put together , there is no climate change due to mans activity, piers is such a prat sometimes
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology: www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
When I was 15yrs old in 1966 the 'environmental alarmists' said the world has 20 years left. Since then every year it stayed at 20 years left, right up until today
What cracks me up is he's older than me, I haven't noticed it getting warmer or the sea level rising, and I live by the sea. Do they not look out the window and see for themselves??
No, I asked the BBC why they constantly report warming "news" but never mention worldwide record cold events in 2019, continuing into 2020. I'll let you know when they reply, it's been a few weeks... 🙄
If we were to ask these climate alarmists "How much CO2 is actually in our atmosphere and how much of it is man-made?" 99.99% of them wouldn't have a clue. And that's the crux of the matter. E.g. the UK's CO2 contribution 'of the TOTAL' is 0.00038% (entire atmospheric CO2 content being just 0.04%), which mathematically accounts for ZERO! Similar - non problematic - statistics apply to all other countries, even the US and China. And THAT'S the scientific and mathematical result. CO2 has almost NOTHING to do with climate change. We're being conned on a massive scale!
Are they also like the 97% who agreed? A lot of them weren't even climate scientists. Will we find some gender studies people & Sociology professors agreeing?
Recent studies of the 2000 + scientists show that Mickey Mouse voted several times along with school kids, students, and hundreds of people in other fields of science but very, very, few (if any) actual climate scientists.
Piers Morgan does not know what he is talking about. At 400 ppm the radiative forcing due to CO2 in the atmosphere is 87% saturated. Each additional molecule of CO2 produces less and less warming - it's a logarithmic relationship, not an exponential one. Recent peer-reviewed papers suggest the equilibrium climate sensitivity is around 1.5 deg C per doubling of CO2, which will be benign and beneficial to the world, rather than the IPPC's "worst case scenario" of around 4.5 deg C based on a theoretical positive feedback factor between CO2 and water vapour. There is no empirical evidence for this proposed positive feedback mechanism. These facts show that there is no climate emergency. It's all a cash grab by vested interest groups and the Green Blob.
Morgan spouting “facts” is laughable especially when he drowns out his guest speakers just repeating them. He can believe the hype if he wants, that’s his democratic right, but he can’t ram his opinions down his guests throats, or at least he shouldn’t on MSM ... oh I forgot, our loveable BBC now has an agenda, it’s not democratic any more, I do keep forgetting that... sad days
Naomi has to prepare better for these kinds of tribunal interviews. She shouldnt let herself get interrupted all the time and shouldnt answer "stupid" questions from these clowns and instead making her point clear for the people watching those shows. Disgusting how disrespectful they are against Naomi, 3 on 1, very brave!👏👏👏
Instead of getting two scientists to debate the issue with none partial hosts in the middle, society dictates we get a couple of kids to aspire to. Well done 👍
First you ask her if she thinks the planet is heating up at a dangerous rate then, later you said you just asked her if she thinks it is heating up. Great job Piers.
What an effing liar! He just said it seconds earlier then denies that he asked the question "Do you believe the planet is heating up at a DANGEROUS RATE?"
Young people should be worried about their future. Not because of "climate change", but because they've been taught to just believe what someone else tells them, rather than do their own research and think for themselves.
I was in high school a lecturer say the polar ice are melting at a rate that it would melt on 20 yrs now finish college got merried, polar ice is still thier it more than 23yrs now.
Thumbs up for Naomi Seibt, but not for the interviewers, neither for the woman nor for the man. The man repeatedly interrupts Naomi while his colleague grins stupidly.
I would love to do something for climate science. I am studying climate since 2006 and are inerested in what is happening. I never believed that CO2 is the main driver for climate cahnge. Something felt odd and I want to help those who see the benefits in more CO2 like faster plant growth and shrinking deserts. I mean who wants a desert to grow, which happens when the world becomes a cold and dry place like 13000 years ago? I would love to live on a planet where the whole world is tropical. But for that it has go go back to its 25°C average temperature stage it had most of the time. I know what's going on.
Thankyou Naomi, please get your(the real truth) message to billions of ears Piers has a very very short memory, just 1 sentence, ...apparently gold fish do better
Say what you want about Piers but of all the people who threatened to leave the US if Trump became President, he's the only one who followed through with it, and we here in the US are grateful for his departure.
Thanks for watching this video. Subscribe to our channel so you don't miss Naomi take on the establishment!
Heartland
Naomi is definitely improving and honing her message but still has way to go. Please practice her more before throwing her to the hungry press.
Stay strong Naomi! The truth will out!
Naomi did well considering she got ambushed by a bully
Home Brew
Yes she got ambushed
And she held it together well on national tv
Needs to be more fluid.
Turn the question away from denial of warming and to supporting scientific exploration
The alarm is coming from politics, not science
This was so silly. An untrained nineteen year old girl is in no way qualified to overturn scientific findings via Google searches on her i phone. Of course, everyone is free to question whatever they wish but the opinions of laypeople don't and shouldn't carry the same weight as the consensus of the world's experts on the subject. The world's population of scientists that study this are the experts and expertise matters. I'm not picking on Naomi here either (although I should as misguided as she sounds), all of these criteria also equally apply to Greta.
Heartland representing the issue of climate change as nothing more than a spat between teenage girls by pitting them against each other in a separate video (Titled "whom should we trust") is a transparently desperate attempt at marginalizing the scientific issue that climate change really is - and a pathetic one at that.
Jason M
You’re misunderstanding her role.
It’s not to represents the SCIENTISTS finding non alarmist fluctuating climate but rather her PEERS, to quell alarmism and to promote scientific study
Piers you are a liar. You asked her if the warming was "dangerous" to which she said no.
Exaclty, if this isn't evidence that so many people are just blind nutjobs, endlessly spewing alarmists BS then I don't know what is. The man clearly doesn't know what is coming out of his own mouth. If you can't slow down and carefully consider what you say, then you shouldn't be part of the conversation.... ....you shouldn't be "taken seriously in this debate".... ....."it's just a fact".
That girl is not a scientist so her no means nothing. Meanwhile, scientists say it is dangerous. I wonder where I place my bet...?
Maddog Mcgruels there is evidence. Read the IPCC SR15 for gods sake!
Neptunus9 Ditto for Thunberg
Jesse Young no. I believe in science. You a flat earther too? 🤣🤣🤣
“Do you believe the planet is heating up AT A DANGEROUS RATE.” Then Morgan promptly forgets his actual question. 🤦🏼♀️
That's because he is simply a moron.
Yeah. PM is an azz. No amount of fair play, when talking to children.
Pierce is a condescending pompous ass!
I survived the end of the world at least 5 times
Greetings young one. I lost count already.
How many times did the world end from global cooling vs global warming?
@@Adeon55 10 Times at least www.foxnews.com/science/10-times-experts-predicted-the-world-would-end-by-now
We have only 10 years of suffering Left,,,, i thought they said 12 years left ... You can still get a 30 year bank loan
#me too
Piers can't even bully this girl, I love that finally a erudite and educated voice of reason amidst all this chose. Adults have been abusing children too long in this fraud of all time x
And I'll bet her English is better than Piers' German !
Adults used to be children... bullying is just a bad habit.
Morgan can't even remember the question that he asks Naomi, "is the planet heating up at a dangerous rate?". To quote Bugs Bunny, "What a moroon!".
😂
Tom Javman
Nice comment but you insulted bugs who is obviously much smarter then Morgan
Bob A LOL! No Bob, you misunderstood me. All I did was QUOTE Bugs, whose quotation does a wonderful job of describing Morgan. Obviously Bugs is far more intelligent than Morgan! 😜
Tom Javman
My mistake that I misread your wonderful comment. Still happy I stood up for bugs because of his superior intelligence. Again my apology 👍😁🙏🇺🇸
Bob A 👍
It’s only heating up if you believe the temperature that was altered by Prof Mann to erase the warming
periods of the past to make it appear that we are seeing significant warming now. It shows that Morgan knows nothing, absolutely nothing, about the science. Disappointed by Morgan. Usually a fan but he got this wrong.
Notice how his cohost didn’t correct him either......incredibly dishonest
He used to argue with Susanna on all these progressive issues up until recently. I guess he’s getting paid the same as her now!
Yes his argument went from "warming at a dangerous rate" to any warming at all. But in fairness, Naomi also misquoted him, she changed "warming at a dangerous rate" to "catastrophic warming". She then goes on to falsely claim the science touted by the IPCC is based on computer models. So both were wrong to varying degrees but she was more wrong than Piers.
At least he apologized when he realized his error. Yet another loss for the denial set.
Jason M ... the projections are based on computer models based on the supposed science of CO2 being the control knob of the global temp and those models are all over the place. The IPCC takes an average....an average of many wrong projections does not make a correct one.
Dangerous or catastrophic?....semantics. It’s easy to misquote when sceptics hear both of those words being used regularly. Besides...Piers misquoted himself, not someone else.
Another loss for the alarmists
@@antiprogpragmatist9350 Incorrect. The "supposed science" the models utilize are otherwise known as *physical laws* to the scientifically literate. All apolgies if the laws of physics are at odds with your political views. Furthermore, output from global ensemble mean projections are in very good agreement with observations.
berkeleyearth.org/global-temperatures-2017/
Secondly, Naomi was the one who used the term "catastrophic" not Piers. Whereas they both used the term "dangerous" (Naomi agreed to it tacitly) she was the one who changed "dangerous" to "catastrophic." For those of us who understand the English language, we know that 'catastrophe' denotes greater severity than 'danger.' While anything catastrophic is dangerous, not everything dangerous is catastrophic.
Given that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I like the way you concluded your response. Very stylish.
Swing...and a miss.
Jason M ...I know the word she used...little difference. Piers should have picked up on it right away when challenged as well as his cohost which was what my original post was about....right?
I’m not going to get into a pissing war with an alarmist. If you’re so brainwashed to believe that the average from about one hundred wide ranging models somehow gives accurate global warming projections....good luck with that...because I couldn’t possibly care less what you believe
I watched this interview this morning during breakfast and felt that there was a clear bias in favour of the climate alarmist. Naomi Seibt wasnt allowed to get her point across. They immediately followed the interview with the weather girl taking everyone through a chart explaining how humans are definitely responsible for climate change, ignoring a comment from Piers Morgan that the climate has constantly changed over thousands of years. I feel bad for Naomi, who had to sit through the weather girls presentation without being given the oppurtunity to comment, but hopefully this kind of thing will only make her stronger in her search for truth via facts.
Hmm, interesting explanation. Is there data available about the heating process? From an unbiased sources would be the best :)
@@Cspacecat how about actually allowing the girl to get her point across, in the same way that Greta's script writers do?
The English girl was allowed to speak uninterrupted but the German girl was hectored and insulted (he implied she was a publicity seeker). Never seen Thurnberg face that kind of questioning.
@@Cspacecat copying and pasting someones theory doesnt necessarily result in your passing on facts. Everyone needs to discuss this, it needs to be debated, not simply accepting it as it was approved by the Rothschilds. There are as many scientists who dispute this as there are who (are no doubt paid to) promote it. Let them discuss. Let Naomi have a voice. The climate alarmists will not sit with those who disagree and discuss the situation, and that needs to be addressed.
Naomi is great she is intelligent, smart and has the better ideas on her side...greetings from germany...hope you are doing well in GB without the EU...SOLIDARITY WITH GREEK WHILE DEFENDING OUR BOARDERS😷
He’s says it’s heating up at a DANGEROUS rate, it’s not, fact.
2000 libtards who labeled themselves "Scientists" and believe they're the brightest minds... when they're all idiots.
True, Erin.
But Anthony, it's actually worse than that, as it is the deliberate misrepresentation of the global temperature statistics, trends, and number of scientists agreeing...in order to make the data appear to be dangerous. Research "climategate"...as it is really just the new world order's agenda 21 being enacted.
@@faith4today I believe this old virus with a new name is part of that same agenda. They did the same thing to the death stats in Italy. There are 60 million people and Italy has the highest elderly population in Europe. The media said "800 People died in one day in Italy!" ... Well the death statistics for Italy are 640,400 people die every year in Italy. That's an average of 1754 people a day. So 800 people who were elderly probably would have died from any flu and still would have been a good day in Italy at almost half the normal deaths.
Kids by the hundreds of thousands went to the beaches in Florida for Spring Break.. and yet it didn't affect the "Pandemic" numbers what so ever? Something is a miss here.. We're being lied and manipulated and it's destroying America's economy. Which is part of Agenda 21.
@Anthony I cannot say your wrong, as it may very well be that that is the case...but I trust their plan will fail...as I don't believe it is yet time for America's fall.
bcstractor
Wow. Brilliant response!!!
Pay attention to this one people, he's a special kind of stupid.
I agree with Piers Morgan on a number of issues but he can massive prick when someone disagrees with ideological view of the world. That was an incredibly disrespectful hack job of an interview. There are less straw men in a scarecrow factory. You handled yourself professionally Naomi and the thinking rational people of this world see right through this garbage and are behind you 100%.
@@CspacecatAGW is actually quite simple. Without a high positive feedback from water vapor/clouds , CO2 increases from burning fossil fuels cannot cause catastrophic omg we're all gonna die global warming.
This high postive feedback value is not known and is a guess. It is assumed to be high because for CO2 to be the primary driver of climate (another guess) it has to be high. The climate models do not and cannot model water vapor/clouds accurately so the positive forcing value for increased water vapor from increased CO2 is guessed and entered into the climate models manually. If you read the IPCC reports they say they cannot model water vapor/clouds accurately. I believe the exact words are "remains challenging"
The end result of this is a guessed high climate sensitivity which caused predicted levels of warming made 30 years ago to be far above what actually happened. This discrepancy is the difference between hysterical alarmism and rational scientific debate and discovery of how the climate functions as a whole.
Simply assuming there is high positive feedback because it is assumed CO2 is driving the climate is not science. Using deeply flawed incomplete model outputs based on flawed and incomplete inputs as evidence is also not science. Refusing to debate or discuss challenges to a hypothesis is not science. Labeling people who are skeptical of bold unsubstantiated claims as "deniers" is not science. Starting with a conclusion and filtering out that which contradicts that conclusion is not science. Claiming that the science behind AGW is settled is not science. Claiming science is a democracy is not science.
@@Cspacecatthis is how science works... czcams.com/video/OL6-x0modwY/video.html
TheSlimeyLimey . Beautifully said. 👍
It's a sad thing when a very polite 17 year old is taken advantage of for her politeness; because of the rudeness of an adult.
She would have been better off being an interrupting asshole like Piers.
He does it regularly and never apologises when proved wrong. He nearly shit himself when Tommy Robinson picked up that quaran.
They continually interpret the young lady who disagrees with climate change and Morgan was extremely rude to her. She handled it very well...👏
Impressive how she stood up to him.
Because she knows she's' right and backed by real science not speculation.
EF M -Typical response of a moron and actually she did, you just weren't listening. Also where did she have the time to explain, being interrupted constantly? Try watching other videos with her to get more on her knowledge on the subject. Plus if you actually believe climate change is real or more specifically dangerous, try listening to other experts in the field, such as the originator of the Weather Network who states unequivocally Global warming is a natural cycle, proven and shown scientifically.
@EF M -Why is it you climate morons like to spew alot of crap, do you think copying and pasting an article will defend your idiocy? You are falling for a hoax, a lie, and obviously listening only to what the globalist 'establishment' wants you to hear, MSM not excluded. CO2 makes up less then 1.0% of the greenhouse and in reality has been at its lowest level in centuries, just recently seeing a slight upturn, which is good and can be witnessed by the increased forest growth world-wide. The actual experts in the field, with many studies behind them, suggest that CO2 levels are not in any way raising the earth's temperature and also the temperature has only gone up very slightly in the past 100 years, most likely due to radiation from the sun. Piers and the rest lie through their teeth about study results claiming 2000 scientists agree>Total BS. Fact is in of the 20 odd studies accumulated in the overall study world-wide, the Russian study seems to be by consensus the most accurate and it does not show an issue with global warming anywhere outside the historical norms. The planet has been going through climate cycles as far back as we can study, we just happen to be in one of the fairest luckily. Don't take my word for what I have asserted here do more research on the topic and you'll see how wrong you are.
Good to know there are young, intelligent people like Naomi Seibt in this world.
Naomi is the smartest person on that whole panel.
The truly smart people usually remain in hiding as they're exhausted by people who aren't receptive to actual advanced reasoning as people are too prideful to admit their lack of info/flaws
@Maga 2020 Baby You've proven to be the stupidest person on the internet today, congratulations.
Maga 2020 Baby Says the guy with a vernacular of a neanderthal and who believes in a mythical entity that created women from the rib of a man. You also relate to scientists being stupid for not believing in an imaginary person in the sky and believing in Bigfoot haha, that’s so misinformed and outright ridiculous. Scientists come to conclusions based off empirical evidence and repeatable experiments that show predictable results, you and other religious fanatics believe (which is defined as thinking of something as true with no evidence to back it) in an entity in the sky because simple people 2000 years ago told you so in a book. Haha Again, congratulations ‘duh, fuck stick, uh duh... I done did insulted you with swear words, duh’ haha Fucking simpleton.
Maga 2020 Baby Wow, your stupidity really shines. Not once did I mention anything to you about my views on climate change, yet you’re so Dunning Krueger that you felt the urge to attack me on that, using your ultimate wisdom of knowing everything (including about me). To attack someone without prior knowledge to their stance on a subject just goes to show a simple minded person with no real perception, especially in an argumentative manner, just shows immaturity.
Now, like I said in regards to scientists; science is the only way of knowing objective truth as it’s the only form of study that relies on what I stated above. Now, obviously there’s corruption in all facets of life and not everyone can be trusted.
In regards to climate change, it’s a real thing! The climate changes, it’s been shown that the Earth experiences periods of warm and periods of cold climates and it shifts over a long period of time. Many factors contribute to the change of climate and Carbon dioxide levels is one of them. So yeah, humans polluting the air with high levels of carbon dioxide will have an impact on the climate. Now, to say to what extent can’t be said or proven either way as we don’t live in the future. My stance on climate change is neither misinformed or extreme in any way, and it’s calculated and thought through logically on basis of data presented over a smorgasbord of scientific study. Now, if you’re going to write off scientists as being moronic shills, you have to remember that your counter argument that climate change is bullshit (or whatever you actually think about it) comes from scientific studies carried out by scientists as well. So you’re contradicting your own argumentative points to support your opinion.
Again, you assume that I just believe (belief is the lack of intelligence due to it being defined as thinking of something as true without any evidence to back it, pointing this out to draw the striking comparisons between science and religion) scientists because of a title of ‘scientist’. Science is the study of nature and again, relies on predictable results from experiments and empirical evidence. Now, like I said, people in all facets can be corrupt. That said, at least with any scientific paper published, it can be peer reviewed by anyone who knows that topic or study through and through, or anyone willing to learn then replicate the experiment to see for themselves. You don’t have this in any religious cult out there, all rules a set in stone and you have to subjectively believe or you’ll be sent to fiery hell to burn haha madness. So no, you believing in God is not the same as me relying more on the scientific world for facts of nature through evidence proving study.
I don’t know what crazy west borough church site you’re reading but no, scientists haven’t relied on Bigfoot being the ‘missing link’ as that’s preposterous, no evolutionary biologist is out there thinking ‘Bigfoot , I know it’s a myth but maybe, just maybe, this made up creature is the missing link’.
So furthermore, you’ve proven to be the stupidest person on the internet today, especially paired with your ill informed attempts at outsmarting people with your contradictions and your mythical creatures and entities. and Again, congratulations.
@Maga 2020 Baby Oh, pleaeeeeese! 2020 on the street, but mega-babies still believe in patriarchal fables 🤮🤮🤮
Piers should resign for lying and treating Naomi that way, horrible man, and his side kick not much better.
Piers is locked into the foolish "Settled Science" meme.
He's a twat!
Don't like the man but it's very likely he was not "lying". Why would he do that when his comments are a matter of record? He just overlooked the fact that he had used that term to describe warming and corrected it when it was pointed out to him. We all make mistakes, does not make us liars. Calm down.
Yeah fuck him and fuck the planet too!
He's nothing but a trashy "gotcha" interviewer.
"By the way, contrary to what was said in the media, I never actually got that personal apology from him..."
-Naomi Seibt
Upper class English girl: we've made huge changes as a family to address climate change, we've cut the servants' pay.
Yeah, it's a joke , she is obviously well to do, with nothing to do, what I call a snobby fukin cow, a clueless one at that , she has all the latest hi tek gear from Asia and I bet a big fuk off TV in her room , yes from Asia, bet daddy bought her a 2 lts sports car as well, pathetic
She did say that she buys locally produced food which is a VERY good thing for supporting local farmers and local economy while reducing POLLUTION which is the REAL THREAT not cLiMaTe ChAnGe.
@@stuzo666 are you even listening to what she said or are you incapable of doing so if you're expecting the person might say sth you won't agree with? she literally said the exact opposite of all that stuff you're accusing her of so for the sake of mankind I hope you're a bot bc if you're not you and to some extend we all are in trouble :D
@@MassaManUtdChannel your a typical leftie, this 17 upper crust sorry ass excuse for a human is a fukin hypocrite , she has all the mod cons from China, the biggest polluter, ohhhhhh but thats ok isn't it, do as I say not as I do???? She like , mental Greta, are just doing all this shit to line their mummy and daddy's pockets, it will keep the bentleys ticking over and the duck pond in tact and keep little sophie and nigel at grammar school, a frickin joke
😂
Piers is like all his kind - when his mouth is open his ears are shut.
Piers Morgan has some talents but none were evident in this interview with Naomi Seibt. Two seasoned 'professionals' bullying the young girl rather than letting her say her bit. What a pity and what complete numpties!
Piers Morgan has failed all the way here. Naomi Seibt owned him from A to Z. Also, he should be ashamed not letting talking a young 19 YO girl when he asks her questions. Intimidation and rudeness will not impress his audience.
I think Piers likes the sound of his own voice, regardless if he makes sense or not.
I didn't see any apology.
Barry Bloggs
I didn’t either and this young lady deserved one.
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology:
GMB: Piers Morgan corrects himself and apologises to guest
08:47, Wed, Mar 4, 2020
www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
It doesn't say that there is one.
It merely says that this is the interview that Morgan had to apologise for.
@@dfordiligence2398
IF that is the case??
But it IS.
That was not an apology.
Shame on you Piers!
@@ant7936 You are right, it is not a real apology. I should have mentioned that. It's an "ifpology".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology#Ifpology
piers morgan asked:
"Is it DANGEROUSLY warming"
the answer is NO.
Naomi answered correctly and piers the manipulative LIAR spun his words around like a duplicitous serpent.
“We’re the most consumptive planet” so piers what other planet are you comparing us too 🤔😂
And whoever the female reporter is showed a great deal of independ reporting. Not. The whole time the English girl was talking she was disagreeing with piers questioning and nodding her head every time she spoke. When the German girl spoke the reporter just shook her head and spoke over her. Virtue signaling is why msm viewership is continuing to drop.
Btw. #biggestclickbaitthisweek
and it's only wed
They're trying to warn us so I give em a pass
Comparing us toooooooooooooo?
Slappy Venus 😅👌🏽
@Home Brew good observation.
NAOMI SEIBT
Climate Realist
non-mind-controlled
no BS
or hidden agendered -
we have been waiting for you. Thank you for being.
she works with Heartland institute which takes money from ExxonMobil, there cant be a more transperent hidden agenda
Original comment confirmed re
NAOMI SEIBT.
@@athelstaneofconingsburgh - The Heartland Institute also fund the green movement. You need to dig a little deeper.
@@LordBransty do you have a link explaining that? How much did they give it compared to the amount of money they gave Exxon? It seems a lot of the time they give tiny amounts of money to those causes to try and hide how much they’re giving to companies like ExxonMobil. I’m not looking for a fight as to whether it’s try or false though I actually am interested.
@@jumble-1238 - Sorry Jenny, but I don't. I'd probably read something about it 2 years ago when I posted it.
However, If you go onto the oil companies websites, they're all for net zero. Plenty of promotions regarding cutting emissions.
I'm sure if they were against it, you'd never hear a thing about climate change.
When does he apologise?
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology:
www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
He does not need to apologize. Snobs like Piers NEVER apologize.
Ah yes, the typical and manipulative, “So what you’re saying is...” interview bullying tactics designed to put words in people’s mouths to try and back them into a corner.
I’m glad Naomi held her composure and responded calmly and clearly on all her points.
I was hoping she would say something on the lines of:
“Mr. Morgan, I would appreciate it if you would not try to speak for me based upon your own assumptions and the narrative you’re paid to promote and protect. Please also remain silent and DO NOT interrupt me while I’m talking and I shall respectfully do the same for you.... Now, as I was explaining...”
How much energy is needed to warm the oceans and the landmass. If you compare that with the energy that we as humans use and or the feedback loop with the CO2. It is so egomaniac to think we (the humans) are warming the planet.
It is mind boggling that the public founded organizations like IPCC, NASA would spread false information about climate change. They literal modified the historic data to make appear that temperature is going up sharply.
@ Sean Leith - spot on Prof Michael Man and his ‘hockey stick’ is the one responsible. His fake temperature graph is used by the TV guy come so-called professor Brian Cox and David and his falling walruses Attenborough, in their videos as proof that the temperature is warming. You can’t make this up. But they did!!
Even Cathy Newman is envious of Piers' outstanding ability to pretend someone said something they didn't.
Has he apologised? He didn't in this interview. He should have though as he incorrectly stated that 2000 scientists think the planet is heating up to a dangerous level (whatever 'dangerous level' actually means?)- unless this is something i'm unaware of. Then he criticised Naomi for saying she was contradicting herself when it was him who changed to talking just about warming and leaving out the 'dangerous level'.
Naomi's great - and she'll be even better in the future when she gets used to being interviewed - if you ask people like Morgan to quote his sources he likely wouldn't have a clue.
Yes he has apologised, but not for his BS about the 2000 scientists, just for that second thing you mention. This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology:
www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
I heard no apology for Piers lie about 2000 so called scientists (I will go with 31000 real scientists who think we need not panic and destroy our nations in the Western world).
"Do you believe the planet is heating up at a DANGEROUS RATE?" vs "Do you believe the planet is heating up?" Those are two very different questions. Naomi held her own against Piers's bit of bullying.
This one is right up there with the Tommy Robinson interview. Whatever anyone thinks of Naomi or Tommy, freedom of speech has to come first and to treat it with the utter contempt that Piers and the rest of the msm continue to peddle will only continue to see people seeking their news elsewhere and only watching the msm for comedy entertainment at best.
The response from the girl on the right meant nothing. It didn’t remotely address the question, was just a memorized speech. 🤦🏼♀️
Did I miss him apologizing??
Click bait
@@homebrew332 It's not clickbait. The title clearly says the interview that caused him to apologize. That doesn't imply that the apology would be part of the video.
mkygod obviously I wasn’t the only one that read the title quickly that seemed that. Why wasn’t it titled piers talks to young lady like crap and lies to her about his question ? 😂 but you are correct
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology:
www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
Piers Morgan is ignorant and always asking questions and interrupts when them questions are being answered my mother always told not to interrupt when someone is talking .
The girl from Germany more intelligent than the rest of em put together , there is no climate change due to mans activity, piers is such a prat sometimes
Chris Pratt would be insulted lol
god bless you Naomi greetings from poland !
I'm sorry, but *_at what point in this video, did Piers Morgan actually apologise to Naomi?_*
That´s what I wanna know as well
This channel should have mentioned something about it in the description box. He apologised later, after viewers complained about his idiocy. Here is the apology:
www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
@sean grant DUH
When I was 15yrs old in 1966 the 'environmental alarmists' said the world has 20 years left. Since then every year it stayed at 20 years left, right up until today
I love that the most complicated and important issue of our generation is being debated by children.
Also idiot adults like Piers.
How about letting Naomi answer the questions properly Piers. And remember the question you asked her in the first place.
Love Naomi!
What cracks me up is he's older than me, I haven't noticed it getting warmer or the sea level rising, and I live by the sea. Do they not look out the window and see for themselves??
Arctic ice levels back to within normal range. Ocean temperatures cooling correlated with AMO. Any report on this?
No, I asked the BBC why they constantly report warming "news" but never mention worldwide record cold events in 2019, continuing into 2020.
I'll let you know when they reply, it's been a few weeks... 🙄
thisisnumber0 you will be waiting until the next ice age
If we were to ask these climate alarmists "How much CO2 is actually in our atmosphere and how much of it is man-made?" 99.99% of them wouldn't have a clue. And that's the crux of the matter. E.g. the UK's CO2 contribution 'of the TOTAL' is 0.00038% (entire atmospheric CO2 content being just 0.04%), which mathematically accounts for ZERO! Similar - non problematic - statistics apply to all other countries, even the US and China. And THAT'S the scientific and mathematical result. CO2 has almost NOTHING to do with climate change. We're being conned on a massive scale!
Let's have the list of these so called scientist,, so that we may evaluate their credibility and find out who pays them
Mark Elliott 👉 Check out CLINTEL and NIPPC
Are they also like the 97% who agreed?
A lot of them weren't even climate scientists.
Will we find some gender studies people & Sociology professors agreeing?
Recent studies of the 2000 + scientists show that Mickey Mouse voted several times along with school kids, students, and hundreds of people in other fields of science but very, very, few (if any) actual climate scientists.
That poor girly from Cumbria completely brainwashed like a sheep to the slaughter - frightening really
Yeah I said the same about Greta .........
Why can’t we get actual scientists on to debate the science, much of it new? New science needs to be debated and there is allot coming out.
I'm really proud of Naomi. I subscribed to her last summer when she was just starting and now she seems to be getting noticed more
Piers Morgan does not know what he is talking about. At 400 ppm the radiative forcing due to CO2 in the atmosphere is 87% saturated. Each additional molecule of CO2 produces less and less warming - it's a logarithmic relationship, not an exponential one. Recent peer-reviewed papers suggest the equilibrium climate sensitivity is around 1.5 deg C per doubling of CO2, which will be benign and beneficial to the world, rather than the IPPC's "worst case scenario" of around 4.5 deg C based on a theoretical positive feedback factor between CO2 and water vapour. There is no empirical evidence for this proposed positive feedback mechanism. These facts show that there is no climate emergency. It's all a cash grab by vested interest groups and the Green Blob.
I know it is 3,2w/m^2 per doubling. Where do you get this 1,5 degrees from ? Seems alot tbh.
@@talisupremacy7176 Near the end of this video by CDN: czcams.com/video/rN7YHsokRV4/video.html
Morgan spouting “facts” is laughable especially when he drowns out his guest speakers just repeating them.
He can believe the hype if he wants, that’s his democratic right, but he can’t ram his opinions down his guests throats, or at least he shouldn’t on MSM ... oh I forgot, our loveable BBC now has an agenda, it’s not democratic any more, I do keep forgetting that... sad days
Good morning Britain is ITV not BBC but they are both run by corrupt progressive globalists
Brilliant young Lady! Love from Canada!
Troy Reed: Magnetic generator
Stanley Mayers: water fuel cell.
Naomi is the only one of the four that has made an effort to educate herself.
That news man was so so rude to the young lady from Germany he kept interesting her. She couldn't even answe his questions. She was so polite.
Thank god for Naomi and the Heartland Institute for telling the truth...
Link to the apology?
www.express.co.uk/videos/6138247023001/GMB-Piers-Morgan-corrects-himself-and-apologises-to-guest
D for Diligence Thanks
I'm amazed how calm she stayed, you could see he was going for the wind up there.
"Do you believe there has been catastrophic global warming"
"no"
"blasphemer"
I can‘t believe how unprofessional Pierce Morgan is, he should be ashamed of himself.
Well done Naomi, interupting you continuously did not stop your knowledge showing through
Naomi Seibt is a very laudable woman, and an intelligent option for humans throughout the Earth. I stand by her!
Naomi has to prepare better for these kinds of tribunal interviews.
She shouldnt let herself get interrupted all the time and shouldnt answer "stupid" questions from these clowns and instead making her point clear for the people watching those shows.
Disgusting how disrespectful they are against Naomi, 3 on 1, very brave!👏👏👏
When children who know nothing are telling grown ups how to live we are in a terrible confused state!
Naomi is not a child - unlike the other protagonist - as she is 19 years old and therefore a young woman and a science student studying the climate.
Instead of getting two scientists to debate the issue with none partial hosts in the middle, society dictates we get a couple of kids to aspire to. Well done 👍
First you ask her if she thinks the planet is heating up at a dangerous rate then, later you said you just asked her if she thinks it is heating up. Great job Piers.
Reminds me when Ben Shapiro destroyed Morgan and he said
"How dare you!" Before Greta was even able to make 5 coherent sentences.
He didn’t let her elaborate. Beautiful!
Naomi Seibt is right!
What an effing liar! He just said it seconds earlier then denies that he asked the question "Do you believe the planet is heating up at a DANGEROUS RATE?"
2 TV hosts who think they're Scientists
Piers certainly didn’t apologise. He said she has the right to push back on that but he didn’t have the good grace to say he was wrong.
Stay strong Naomi, truth will prevail
how inconvenient when someone confronts the hysteria with science ! 😆
If I was Naomi's father I'd be proud of her for researching and learning about the topic before talking.....smart kid
Young people should be worried about their future. Not because of "climate change", but because they've been taught to just believe what someone else tells them, rather than do their own research and think for themselves.
YES NAOMI!!!!!
Naomi put her points eloquently, intelligently and respectfully. Piers could learn a great deal from her.
I support Naomi Seibt. Climate changes Everytime since the beginning of the world.
I was in high school a lecturer say the polar ice are melting at a rate that it would melt on 20 yrs now finish college got merried, polar ice is still thier it more than 23yrs now.
That was unnecessarily rude. They read a few articles online and they act like they are some experts in climate change
Thumbs up for Naomi Seibt, but not for the interviewers, neither for the woman nor for the man. The man repeatedly interrupts Naomi while his colleague grins stupidly.
Morgan played a word switch game with the Naomi girl and also tricked her by playing both sides at same time. Pathetic!
I would love to do something for climate science. I am studying climate since 2006 and are inerested in what is happening. I never believed that CO2 is the main driver for climate cahnge. Something felt odd and I want to help those who see the benefits in more CO2 like faster plant growth and shrinking deserts. I mean who wants a desert to grow, which happens when the world becomes a cold and dry place like 13000 years ago? I would love to live on a planet where the whole world is tropical. But for that it has go go back to its 25°C average temperature stage it had most of the time. I know what's going on.
Let Naomi speak, stop interrupting her!
She is right people need to do the research that guy wants to be heard unexposed.
Piers DID ask a different question. He did not merely ask if the planet is heating up. He needs to review what he said to Naomi.
Amazing how the media will allow a teenage young girl on to talk science but will not allow any climate scientist who knows the SCIENCE.
See the US Senate minority report of 2008 which documents over 600 real scientists who have called the UN paper" just politics not science" .
The way this adult man talks to a 17 year old is not very nice. He acts like a bully. He can learn alot from this bright and polite young lady.
C'mon be scared, live in fear. Do it!
Why has our society start listening so seriously to children?
Naomi - lass dich nicht von den Moderatoren beirren, du hast alles richtig gemacht 👍👍👍
Thankyou Naomi, please get your(the real truth) message to billions of ears
Piers has a very very short memory, just 1 sentence, ...apparently gold fish do better
I believe In God 🙏🇮🇪
According to Al Gore, we should all be underwater by now!
Naomi is right, bright and intelligent and does her research!
Naomi thank you .
Piers hammered on her, she didn't budge or go screaming into the mic.
Morgan blatantly lies in this interview with Naomi, first saying
Anyone else notice how they introduced each one of them? The alarmist is brave, the other is anti-something...
Yeah, no bias in the media.
Say what you want about Piers but of all the people who threatened to leave the US if Trump became President, he's the only one who followed through with it, and we here in the US are grateful for his departure.