Climate Hustle (2017) - full transcript

here is the takeaway

unless the world changes course quickly

and drama

dramatically the fundamental systems

that support human civilization

are at risk we're likely to see hundreds

of millions of what we'll call

environmental refugees as coastal

communities like this one

are at risk and in the worst case

scenario could disappear



altogether in the coming centuries new

york could be abandoned

its famous landmarks lost to the sea

boston philadelphia washington

miami they would all be underwater that

if the sea level rise

occurred fast enough some major cities

might have to be abandoned

like for instance london this is about

life or death

it is a planetary emergency

there is widespread scientific agreement

that this is the most

immediate threat to life as we know it



do you ever wonder how global warming

became such an enormous crisis

does it demand an immediate solution hi

i'm mark morano and i certainly don't

want to see parts of planet earth

submerged beneath the oceans or

destroyed by horrific weather events

and i don't imagine you do either but it

all does seem a bit rushed

doesn't it we repeatedly hear that the

time for debate is passed

the debate is over or so we're told 97

agree that climate change is real

yeah we've heard that too the activists

tell us we must act now

or else time is growing very very short

president obama is the last president

with a chance

so if it feels as though you're being

rushed maybe you are

prominent scientists from around the

world reject claims of a climate

catastrophe

in fact growing numbers of experts see

the whole issue as a sleight of hand

a climate hustle

this is the con game known as three card

monty the dealer pressures the mark

the person he hopes to fool into playing

his game

it's a simple game of deception designed

to lure a person into thinking he can

predict which of the three cards

is the queen of hearts only the mark

never wins

the flim-flam man knows this and takes

his money

when the people pushing to get you into

the game the ones who are predicting a

calamitous future due to global warming

don't show their cards it is a hustle

they tell us we need to get rid of the

fuels that power our homes and cars and

factories and cities and economies

the global warming fears have led to the

government regulating our light bulbs

and thermostats and vehicles

and now there are even proposals for

carbon ration budgets

for every man woman and child on the

planet

open up or we'll bust it energy police

we're here to check out your power

consumption oh

look at this a microwave hey

plasma tv extraordinary claims require

extraordinary evidence yet climate

activists claim the debate is over that

no

scientists disagree and that we face a

certain calamity

unless we act now before it's too late

these are the hallmarks of a hustle

in this film we're going to show you all

the cards you'll hear from scientists

from prestigious institutions worldwide

including nasa

princeton the university of london

georgia institute of technology

university of pennsylvania and many more

some have won nobel prizes and many are

former or current u.n climate panel

scientists who have now

turned on the un you'll see all of the

cards

and we'll let you decide for yourself if

they are playing it straight

or if you are being hustled

global warming has many claims but one

of the most persistent is that 97

of scientists all agree between 95 and

97 percent of scientists agree

that climate change is happening now 97

of experts say this

three percent say that and conservatives

are saying

i'm gonna go with the three percent

that's not conservative that's

trotskyite radical

um i'm an ap environmental science

teacher so i teach high school

environmental science

and yes we like to tell our students

that the majority of science

all of them in fact do agree i wanted to

have it smart scientists 10 out of 10

smart scientists agree

if we'd had this interview mark 10 years

ago

i would have said i've never thought

about climate i assume

all the scientists who are reporting and

telling the president and the prime

minister of england are right

i didn't have any reason not to accept

the judgment of my colleagues

you know the consensus and the whole

ipcc process

and you know i bought into it you know

don't trust what one scientist says

trust what these hundreds thousands of

international scientists have come up

with with

years of deliberation when somebody

asked me eight or ten years ago

what's causing global warming i said

well i guess there's carbon dioxide

that's all i've ever heard

any wisps of doubt that human activities

are at fault

are now gone with the wind so i bought

into that

and supported the consensus you think

it's global warfare yes

yes that's do you james yeah we're

unanimous

we all think it's global warming science

does not function

by consensus and most certainly not by

politically driven consensus

in fact the history of consensus in

science is terrible

from galileo right the way through the

beginning of the 20th century 95 percent

of scientists for goodness sake believed

in eugenics

science has to by its very nature be

skeptical so basically what you get is

you get hundreds of scientists to just

repeat what they've heard

you know in the medical community it

might have been years ago you know

all medical experts all doctors agreed

that stomach ulcers were caused by

you know stress and spicy food professor

william schlesinger who served as a un

climate panel lead author

freely admits that very few un

scientists are climate experts

there's actually a huge range of

different disciplines represented there

i

i i'm gonna have to give you a guess

um that something on the order of 20

have

some dealing with climate the fact that

there are people

sort of who are nominally there does not

really mean that they support what is

going on

i mean working group two was essentially

run by a small clique

of people automatically a small group

forms

ahead that runs the thing and

unfortunately those those

that small group i would think are not

the most representative

or the most balanced or the most

unbiased of people

at 100 scientists 97 agree that climate

change

is real at this point who's refusing to

accept the science

well i guess we could agree to disagree

that's a marketing that's an advertising

ploy i don't think it means anything

i don't think 97 percent of people who

look at

the climate data critically share the

opinion that

anthropogenic emissions of co2 is a

primary driver of climate

the 97 estimate is bandied about by

basically everybody

i had a close look at what this study

really did as far as i can see

this estimate just crumbles when you

touch it none of the statements in the

papers is supported by any

data that is actually in the paper but

it's 97

is essentially pulled from thin air it's

not based on any credible

research whatsoever but one survey that

claimed 97

of scientists agreed was not based on

thousands of scientists or even hundreds

of scientists

but only on 77 of those 77 scientists

75 answered the survey to form the

mythical 97

consensus in this instance the 97

percent

wasn't even 97 scientists it's fiction

97 was a figure that was arrived at

many years ago by the people who pushed

this agenda

they then realized they needed some sort

of support for it so they did a couple

of very dopey papers

proponents of man-made global warming

often point out that the national

academy of sciences in the american

meteorological society

and other large science groups have

issued statements endorsing the

so-called consensus view

but not a single one of those scientific

organizations

that have issued these very dramatic

statements agreeing with the ipcc and

the royal society

actually pulled their scientist members

and showed that a

majority of their members agree many

scientists who do not agree with the

statement attributed to all of them

they never pull their rank and file but

it's nothing new

we were here 100 years ago and i was in

the psychology department

i'd be telling you that by the science

of craniology

black people are stupider than white

people west europeans are

smarter and more creative than east

europeans this was called phrenology

and all the data and statistics they

could line up and shuffle supported it

and everybody believed it to me these

kinds of claims of

settled science it's it's really

antithetical to the scientific process

it reflects confirmation bias groups

pink

so it's simply propaganda

the man-made global warming narrative

says the evidence is all in

and mankind is responsible for a climate

calamity

so let's first take a look at some of

the scientific claims backing up

the alleged climate crisis increased

amounts of greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere mean more heat is trapped

warming the earth most scientists agree

that rising temperatures are caused by

an increase of greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere

primarily carbon dioxide fueled by

mankind's consumption of fossil fuels

is carbon dioxide an essential trace gas

in the atmosphere

the key driver of global temperatures

the co2 we are putting into the

atmosphere right now

is going to add to warming for decades

into the future so you can get to a

situation where

it just the oceans will begin to boil

boiling the oceans before we get there

let's first examine the source of all

this fear

rising co2 levels climate is the most

complex

coupled non-linear chaotic system

known to man of course there are human

influences in it nobody knows that

but what outcome will they get by

fiddling with one

variable at the margins i'm sorry it's

scientific nonsense

the climate system is extremely complex

it's virtually impossible to think of

doing an experiment

where we'd be able to tweeze out the

impact

of co2 versus the hundreds of other

variables

at work because we've only been shining

our flashlight

on one thing let's see human

carbon dioxide and aerosols we've been

neglecting a whole lot of other things

like the sun's influence on climate

is carbon dioxide the control knob i

don't see

anything in the long term geologic

record

to support that conclusion co2 is one of

many many many variables that influence

the earth's

temperature dr robert giegenkek chaired

the department of earth and

environmental science at the university

of pennsylvania

are you afraid of rising co2

concentration no

no i'm not co2 is not the villain

that has been portrayed co2 is a

greenhouse gas

it does trap some heat but its ability

to trap more heat

declines logarithmically this cube

represents man-made co2

a greenhouse gas although it can build

up in the atmosphere

it's only three and a half percent of

all the co2 emitted each year

the rest is natural water vapor

makes up 95 of all greenhouse gases in

the atmosphere

greenhouse gases make up only two

percent of the total atmosphere

so is that one cube of man-made co2

driving the climate

putting a price tag on each ton of co2

poison

co2 poison of co2 poison co2 is not a

pollutant

it's not a poison and we should not

corrupt the english language by

depriving pollutant and poison of the

original meaning

we're really in a co2 famine now most of

the time it's at least a thousand

you know and it's been quite a bit

higher than that the earth was just fine

in those times

the fact that there was both higher

temperatures and an ice age

at a time when co2 was 10 times higher

than today fundamentally contradicts the

certainty

co2 emissions are the main cause of

climate change

water is the most important greenhouse

gas by far

i'm impressed by the fact that the

present climate from the perspective of

a geologist

is very close to the coldest it's ever

been the concentration of co2 in the

atmosphere today is close to the lowest

it's ever been

we are currently living on a carbon

dioxide starved planet

and were we to double carbon dioxide in

the atmosphere

which is the figure everybody fears that

would be a small

step back towards restoring the amount

of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere

you can't use carbon dioxide to control

the climate

the plants are growing more robustly

food crops

the trees the forest earth has been

getting greener

and greener and greener we're just

fertilizing the plants so the idea

that in doubling carbon dioxide is going

to be environmentally catastrophic

it's not even wrong it's just a silly

idea we're not dealing with a scientific

issue

we haven't been dealing with a

scientific issue now for 15 years we're

dealing

with a determined political issue it's a

campaign

cause here's what the temperature has

been

on our earth now one thing that kind of

jumps out at you

is well let me put it this way if my

classmate from the

sixth grade that talked about africa and

south america were here he would say

do they ever fit together well in fact

in an inconvenient

truth al gore used the graph of the

vostok ice cores

he said this proves that co2

and temperature are directly causally

related

but he didn't show that actually the

temperature goes up first

usually by about 800 years before the

co2 goes up

more co2 equals a warmer world true or

false

i don't know i mean it may be the other

way around

certainly a warmer world will lead to

more co2

but i'm not impressed that

co2 is a driver of global temperature

and there are so many other variables

that are much more likely to have been

responsible for that

here is where co2 is now

way above where it's ever been as far

back as this record will measure

gore's chart may seem impressive but the

geologic record shows that co2 levels in

the distant past were far

greater than they are today it's already

right here look how far

above the natural cycle this is and

we've done that

here's what it's going to be in less

than 50 years

ultimately this is really not a

political

issue so much as a moral issue

if we allow that to happen it is

deeply unethical al gore genuinely

believes that

if he does not prevail the apocalypse is

coming

his opponents think he is the danger

i think it's a wonderful teaching tool

uh because

it shows how we don't do science

i voted for gore in 2000 yeah and i

think that

if he ran again depending on who he ran

against i might vote for him

he's a smart man but after viewing

gore's film gigging gak

had this reaction and i was appalled i

was appalled because he either

deliberately misrepresented the point it

was making

or didn't understand it so it was

irresponsible of al gore

the verdict from the nobel committee

must be sweet vindication

even the nobel prize is not going to be

enough to silence the naysayers some of

whom still believe that

mann is not responsible for global

warming one of those naysayers is a

nobel prize-winning scientist himself

physicist dr ivar giavere who won the

nobel in 1973.

these two people got the nobel prize in

peace

and i am ashamed of the norwegian

government who did that

what did al gore leave out as we've

detailed there are literally hundreds of

factors that influence global

temperature

the real question is is co2 the tail

that wags the dog

come here come here this is the question

does this part of the dog control the

rest of the dog

that's the atmospheric equivalent of

what al gore wants you to believe good

dog

al gore wants you to believe that that

co2 level up there is the greatest moral

and ethical dilemma of our day

let's play al gore's game we're going to

show you what al gore left

out of his famous scene in an

inconvenient truth so

i think they showed me how to use this

thing let's see if i got it here all

right

let it ride

all right steady thank you here we are

this is the co2 level al gore wants you

to be alarmed at 400 parts per million

this according to scientists means the

earth is currently in a co2 famine

geologically speaking al gore didn't

mention that

take you up to that co2 level

okay al gore did not mention the fact

that there are quite literally

hundreds of other factors according to

scientists that influence

our global climate he downplayed all

these hundreds of other factors

let's just give you but a small sampling

of a few let's start with the sun

oh okay that's pretty bright the sun is

one of the key drivers that al gore

tries to diminish

volcanoes oh that's a big one is that

mount pinatubo

volcanoes and the lack of atmospheric

dust have had a big

impact on our climate there's also

cosmic rays

there's also solar system impact there's

also tilt to the earth's axis

whoa okay okay

okay steady it out today we're listing

okay all right we got it

there's also atmospheric circulation

okay wind tunnel testing there's also

water vapor there's also methane and yes

that does include the infamous cows

belting in

oh really yeah flatulence okay oh no no

get it back get back no no we don't need

that all right

uh you got clouds reflectivity of the

earth

albedo uh you have forest land use

policies soils

and ocean cycles okay

we have a situation here where all these

factories come together this

is many other factors that i'll go left

out and all of these grow

the wind is blowing

it's not simply co2 or the sun co2 in

the oceans

it's co2 versus hundreds of other

factories

influencing our global climate system

into a perfect

atmospheric storm raging all the time

to

so by over emphasizing the role of co2

and underestimating the role of many

other factors

the whole argument of whether or not the

world is heading toward an environmental

disaster gets pretty skewed

but how is the alleged climate consensus

changed over time

after all concern about the weather has

been around for a long time

well before fossil fuels caused global

warming everyone was worried about well

a coming ice age climate experts believe

the next ice age is on its way

if we are unprepared for the next

advance the result could be

hunger and death on a scale

unprecedented in all of history

what scientists are telling us now is

that the threat of an ice age

is not as remote as they once thought

during the lifetime of our grandchildren

arctic cold and perpetual snow could

turn

most of the inhabitable portions of our

planet into a polar desert

british professor hubert lamb says that

a new ice age is creeping over the

northern hemisphere

in his comment tonight howard k smith

talks about the weather and suggests

that we better do something about it

howard we are over ready for a return of

the ice

experts like reed bryson the head of the

biggest meteorological department in the

world

in wisconsin believe that since 1945

that has been in progress we're

returning to an ice age

the argument that we face some long cold

years

is pretty convincing the 1970s global

cooling scare was widespread

before fossil fuels caused global

warming fossil fuels caused

global cooling

we've never been warned like this before

all of us

about climate change i remember when i

was a small boy say 60 years ago

snows were frequent and deep every

winter a change in our climate is taking

place

snows are less frequent and less deep

thomas jefferson said that a

considerable change of climate

must have taken place in the polar

regions the greenland seas

have been covered in ice which in the

last two years

entirely disappeared this was reported

by the president of the uk royal society

no not the current president but sir

joseph banks

president in 1817. here's a more recent

quote

there are ominous signs that the earth's

weather patterns have begun to change

dramatically

with serious political implications for

just about every nation on earth

this was from newsweek magazine in 1975

but it wasn't about global warming

it was a warning of global cooling 1988

was the year the u.n formed its climate

panel

the ipcc 1988 was also the year that

nasa's james hansen testified to

congress about the urgency of global

warming

it was orchestrated in part by then

senators al gore and timothy

worth it was a key moment when global

cooling was officially put to bed

and the conversion to global warming

occurred years later a pbs frontline

episode lifted the curtain on the sort

of illusions that politicians employed

to kick off their climate campaigns on

capitol hill

senator timothy worth was one of the few

politicians already concerned about

global warming

and he was not above using a little

stagecraft

for hansen's testimony we called the

weather bureau

and found out what historically was the

hottest day of the summer

so we scheduled the hearing that day did

you also alter the temperature

in the hearing room that day what we did

it was that

went in the night before and opened all

the windows i will admit right so that

the air conditioning wasn't working

inside the room

dr hansen if you'd start us off we'd

appreciate it

the wonderful jim hansen who was wiping

his brow

at the table at the hearing aid number

one

the earth is warmer in 1988 than at any

time

in the history of instrumental

measurements one of hanson's former

supervisors explained that hanson's

dramatic testimony was not well received

at nasa

we were somewhat appalled we were

certainly embarrassed

we did not muzzle our scientists at all

i probably would have been removed had i

tried to to cut off

jim hansen's funding after all he had al

gore

on his team well that was pretty

revealing

but even that kind of stagecraft isn't

enough to completely fool the public

you have to keep the people in the dark

and by the way three card monty

is just another version of the old shell

game so let's see what's next

in the cards

it's clear that the arctic sea ice

is beginning to recede very rapidly we

saw arctic sea ice diminish to the

lowest level we've ever seen

already polar bears are starving as the

ice they hunt on

vanishes along with the seals they eat

greenland and west antarctic ice sheet

are melting faster than anyone expected

the polar bear is it bears a

disproportionate burden

of the climate the combustion

profligacy energy profligacy so the

polar bear is having a voice

here as part of the march satellite

monitoring of the arctic ice began in

1979 at the end of a 40-year cooling

cycle

when fears of a coming ice age were at

their height you have to look at it in

the longer

perspective and in that long perspective

we know that there was

as little or less ice in the arctic

ocean back in the 1930s

to early 40s as there is today the north

pole lost

one third of its area and 40 percent of

its thickness and it didn't cause

a huge amount of problem there either

with polar bears or anything else

are polar bears disappearing in 1960

as few as 5 000 polar bears roamed the

earth

fast forward five decades their

population has only grown

there are probably five times as many

polar bears now as there were in the

1970s so it doesn't look like they're

hurting too much they're looking for

poster children

it suits their advertising purpose it

has nothing to do with science

the fact that over the last 20 years of

the 20th century

there was a minor fall in the area of

sea level ice

tells you nothing about climate change

if you compare the temperatures

that were present in greenland in the

1930s for example in 1920s

it's clear that it was warmer in

greenland in the 1930s than it is right

now

and so this is nothing unusual perhaps

the most inexplicable claim about arctic

sea ice came from white house science

advisor

john holdren if you lose the summer sea

ice

there are phenomena that could lead you

not so very long thereafter to lose the

winter sea ice as well

and if you lose that sea ice year round

it's going to mean

drastic climatic change all over the

hemisphere

oh my okay unless the continents really

diverge away you know so that the arctic

is no longer enclosed

you will have winter sea ice okay so so

that's

not going to happen mr holden you said

there'd be a

ice-free arctic in the winter do you

still stand by that prediction do you

want to retract that

can you comment on that i'm late for a

meeting he's late for a meeting it's his

comment

we're seeing records set for antarctic

sea ice extent

and this is climate models predict that

antarctic should be losing sea ice and

it's exactly the opposite of what's

happening

i have to laugh probably for laughing

because the energetic ice cap

is not melting the average annual

temperature there is 58 degrees below

zero there's not melting going on in the

first place it's actually growing

why is the sea ice at record high i

think it's getting colder very simple

some scientists say sea level has

accelerated other scientists say sea

level has decelerated

climate fair promoters tell us that

getting this right could be the

difference between

business as usual or being all wet

if enough of that ice melts seas will

rise dramatically

and the results will be calamitous the

scientists now think a sea level rise of

10 feet of more

is inevitable and that there's nothing

we can do now

to stop it the surreal set of images of

what 5

12 and 25 feet of sea level rise

would look like at the jefferson

memorial the supreme court would be

flooded

you could tie your boat to the

washington monument and storm surges

would make the capital unusable

there's no question that sea level rise

on the whole

over the last few decades has

accelerated compared to what it was in

the past

that statement is wrong sea level is not

accelerating it is if anything

diminishing

al gore shows half of florida underwater

no there is a

model somewhere they are doing it wrong

there and this

is this is a lobbying so we start

geological facts

are on one side lobbying and models are

on the other side

if you look at the total

global sea level from about 1850

until the present time it's been

rising at a fairly constant rate rather

slow

about seven inches a century if you're

50 years old

you've experienced a sea level rise of

about three and a half inches and you

probably didn't notice it

the rate of sea level rise has

decelerated over the last few decades

from year to year

not two decades but in the last decade i

really don't want to argue scientific

details with you because i know them

better than you democrat

as well and as much as you do follow

these things

tonight on world news force of nature a

strange storm in new york a parade of

hurricanes tearing across the ocean

is this evidence of the new age of

global warming wildfires and heat waves

are more intense

what used to be the extreme literally

becoming the new normal

hurricane katrina was the first urban

extinction and scientists are worried

that the sustained droughts are

consistent with the overall trend toward

global warming

far heavier downpours they'll be more

frequent now

say scientists as global warming heats

the air

oh it's easy to get lulled into

believing these wild claims

because we hear them over and over again

but if you don't want to be hustled you

have to check the deck

you have to make sure that all the cards

are exposed not just the ones the con

man want you to see

so let's see what other scientists and

data have to say about all these

alarming claims it is misleading and

just plain incorrect to claim the

disasters associated with hurricanes

tornadoes floods or drought have

increased on climate time scales either

in the united states or globally

all of the indicators of extreme weather

are absent it's not a theoretical issue

what the weather would be like below 350

parts per million co2 because

until the year 1988 the co2 was below

350 parts per million so if you look

through the historical record you see

that

the weather was just as bad or possibly

worse below 350 ppm

it is further incorrect to associate the

increasing costs of disasters with the

admission of greenhouse gases

some activists politicians journalists

corporate and government agency

representatives and even scientists who

should know better

have made claims that are just

unsupportable based on evidence and

research

the more powerful hurricanes are mainly

due

to man-made global warming typhoons and

hurricanes are getting stronger

hurricanes have not increased in the u.s

in frequency intensity or normalized

damage since at least 1900

the same holds for tropical cyclones

globally since at least 1970 when we

have good data we are in

in the weakest hurricane period since

records started being kept

in 1900. of course our hurricane luck

could run out at any time but the data

shows that anyone claiming an increase

in hurricane activity due to global

warming

is off base the forecast from hell

why america may see more killer

tornadoes

tornadoes have not increased in

frequency intensity or normalized damage

since at least 1950

and there's some evidence to suggest

they've actually declined if you look at

noaa plots of severe tornadoes they've

actually

generally been declining since the 19th

century and it's making

the droughts much more likely and more

intense

globally and i quote from a recent paper

in nature there has been little change

in drought over the past 60 years

drought has

and here i quote the ipcc for the most

part become

shorter less frequent and cover a

smaller portion of the us

over the last century a record winner of

rain and flood

more evidence of global warming floods

have not increased in the u.s in

frequency or intensity since at least

and remarkably flood losses as the

percentage of u.s gdp have dropped by 75

percent

since 1940. unfortunately

the climate models and this is very

important for you to understand

you can take a look at the ensemble of

the united nations climate models

they are failing at the 95 percent level

they're predicting too much warming i'm

not impressed by the ability of the

models

to either to model the past or to model

the future they say

when they do the models the current

warming can only be explained by co2

well simply untrue it can be explained

by a whole host of other factors they

just choose not to consider those

factors

the models tend to overreact to carbon

dioxide by warming the earth much more

than what has actually happened i think

the models are

basically flawed temperature records

have been altered

considerably particularly in the u.s

historical climate network

the alterations in general result in a

in a cooler

past and a warmer present the

temperature record

has essentially doubled in trend over

the last 30 years

due to adjustments and siding issues the

earth is hotter now

than ever and humans are to blame the

hottest year ever in recorded history

i'm running in the park on saturday in

shots thinking this is great but are we

all going to die

you know i can't figure this out we've

all heard the hype about the hottest

years on record

but satellite data tells us that global

temperatures have held steady for almost

two decades through early 2016.

even the ground-based measurements

backing up these so-called hottest year

claims

reveal differences of only a few

hundreds to barely tenths of a degree

almost immeasurable even if the pause

ended today

the nearly 20-year standstill in

temperatures defied predictions

of a planet in crisis 0.8 degrees it

will be discussing

in global warming 0.8 degrees if you ask

people in general

what it is they think it's four or five

degrees they don't know

it's a little it's not even fever i call

this sort of stuff

kindergarten science the fact that

the temperature was warmer at the end of

the 20th century than it was in the

preceding hundred years

is such a piece of kindergarten science

it's true and it's completely

meaningless in telling you anything

about climate change

the earth has a fever that is growing

more and more intense

i do not believe the earth has a fever

because it's colder now than it has been

through most of the history of life

as you can see on the so-called hockey

stick graph it looks like a hockey stick

lying on its side there you can see the

temperatures all the way back to the

year one thousand

i didn't like it when i first saw it and

when i saw that curve

two things occurred to me one i missed

the medieval warm phase

which is very very well documented and

most people who've looked at the

medieval warm phase

think that the temperature was higher

then than it is now

and the second thing i saw there's a

kink in his curve and the kink

exactly coincided with the change in the

way the measurements were made

and that should raise the suspicion of

any scientist

there hasn't really been any

statistically significant

warming since 1998 okay

this is in spite of 25 of the

anthropogenic carbon dioxide has been

put in the atmosphere since

1998. you've had a long period with no

warming and now accounting for half the

set more than half the satellite record

so so this is the big mystery and it's

exactly

until we have a good answer for that i

say we don't have any particular

confidence

in attributing the warming of the last

quarter of the 20th century

i don't feel the need to explain

the halt in warming because there's so

many

unknowns and there's so many variables

in the climate system

i could attribute it to almost any the

only people who feel a need to explain

that

is the ones who have gone out on a limb

and insisted that co2 is a controlling

factor

so this pause is now statistically

speaking significant it's now something

they can't just brush aside they can't

just say it's happened before they can't

just say it's what they expected

they didn't

sounds like claims that the debate is

over and the science is settled

don't hold up very well under scrutiny

extreme weather events are not

increasing

global temperatures are not alarming

polar bears and ice caps

are doing okay but all good con men know

that the confidence game

falls apart if you have time to slow

down take your time

check the details carefully that's why

they must insist

time is short that action must be taken

immediately to avoid a bigger problem

we saw this with the y2k scare we also

must be ready for the 21st century

from its very first moment by solving

the so-called y2k

computer problem now

the mayan calendar deadline of 2012

scared many

all because folks believe the end of the

world is going to come beginning in

december

three years from now and now global

warming advocates have been pushing a

series of so-called tipping points

saying we will tip the scales and go

past the point of no return

if we don't act immediately we are

running out of time

we have to get to an ambitious global

agreement we have to do it

this year not next year

this year this is a huge crisis but then

it can cross a tipping point and

suddenly shift into high gear

i fear there is not a moment to lose

and of course the clock is ticking

because mother nature does not do

bailouts

scientists believe we have less than 10

years to bring these emissions under

control

to prevent a catastrophe there is an

urgency

to acting unlike anything we've seen

before this

could be their last best chance to deal

with the consequences of climate

change we could pass tipping points with

grave consequences way back in 1989 the

u.n also issued a tipping point

a 10-year climate tipping point or

entire nations could be wiped off the

face of the earth

be in no doubt that unless greenhouse

gas emissions reach their peak within

about 100 months

just 100 months it may well be too late

to stop

temperatures rising beyond dangerous

levels

the grim reality is that our planet has

reached

a point of crisis and we have only seven

years before we lose

the levers of control ladies and

gentlemen we only

we now have only 86 months left before

we reach the tipping point we are

running out of time how many times have

i found myself

saying this over recent years it's hard

to keep up with all these predictions

is it decades we need to cut the

consumption of fossil fuels by over half

in the next 20 years

years the clock is ticking days

hours

now we have to do something right now to

stop global warming

why do tipping points persist in the

climate debate the experts

often don't know any more than you and i

about what's going to happen

in the future so the idea that climate

scientists

have this crystal ball and they know

what's coming

i find that very hard to believe there

was global cooling and prior to that

there was

the population bomb you know millions of

people were going to starve to death

because we couldn't possibly feed this

many

humans there's always something it

installs

fear if you think that your house is

going to underwater

in the next 10 years you're going to be

frightened and you're going to be

willing to accept

things that are being proposed by other

people and we should also understand

that

psychologically there's obviously

something in us

as human beings where we are perhaps we

have been primed to always be worried

about our survival and our existence

so we are very predisposed

to a narrative that says you know we're

all going to die we're all going to die

creating artificial deadlines and

telling people to hurry hurry hurry

is an easy way to pressure them into

making poor decisions

but there's another way to convince

people and trick them into handing over

their money

it involves the use of magic

can man pass legislation through the epa

the united nations congress

and change and alter the weather the

global temperature

the path and frequency intensity of

storms the scientists

at nasa say we can slow the earth's

warming if we cut pollution and have

higher

carbon emission standards it's our

choice how fast the seas rise

and that gives us time to prepare and

protect our communities in a smart way

around the world the anger runs as deep

as the flood waters being blamed on the

global warming the kyoto treaty was

supposed to fight

carbon could cost us the planet what

impact would the epa regulations have on

the climate though

very very positive this was the moment

when the rise of the oceans began to

slow

and our planet began to heal climate

change is not a hoax

more droughts and floods and wildfires

are not a joke

they are a threat to our children's

future and in this election

you can do something about it you can do

something about it you can do something

about it

when president obama says this will be

the time

that the water started to recede because

i'm elected it reminds me of king knut

who took all his advisors down to the

shores of england and said

see how powerful i am tell the waters to

go out

what is the real tipping point number

when do we have to act by it the real

tipping point for me

is that governments stay below 2 degrees

celsius of global warming

not doing it will be catastrophic and

basically none of the crops will grow

most of people have died and the rest of

us will be cannibals civilization will

have broken down

what the few people left will be living

in

in a failed state like somalia or sudan

so try to attribute a given weather

event due to

added co2 or whatever is impossible and

i think we're misleading the public by

telling them that we know

why climate is behaving the way it is i

would

love to be able to think we can control

climate

when of course it is indeed going to

have to be adaptation

flexibility but to an outcome that we

don't know because i actually don't

know what climate they wanting to

produce for us

and actually i don't think they know

either today a form of climate astrology

has taken hold

where every bad weather event is somehow

used to prove

man-made climate change has our modern

society advanced

today global warming is blamed for

causing or worsening a whole range of

issues

including prostitution airplane

turbulence

crime rape car thefts and bar room

brawls

that's right your morning cup of joe

could become a thing of the past

but a new study is dark with no sugar

it says climate change has the wild

arabica coffee plant headed for

extinction in fact anybody who eats

is under threat from climate change

several liberal lawmakers are pushing a

resolution to warn women

that climate change could make them

vulnerable to quote

sex work transactional sex as a woman

does it worry you that unchecked global

warming will lead

to prostitution that's pretty ludicrous

yeah u.s senator debbie stabenow

michigan has claimed

global warming creates volatility and i

feel it when i'm flying

i don't know who's paying for these

studies or who you know where these

people get their salaries

i mean this stuff is so ludicrous but

there's this whole cottage industry

will a carbon tax prevent airline

turbulence

changes in disease trajectories all

kinds of

implications that we can't even fully

fathom global warming is even affecting

the dead

here's a list of hundreds of things

caused by global warming

sacrifice to prevent climate change is

now being proposed

when you see that charge in the wall you

have to now say okay that's that's

contributing to global warming pollution

i have to pull that charger out of the

water

in 2010 the japanese government told its

citizens to go to bed one hour earlier

in order to fight climate change

are we under seed from nature is the

planet angry

we've been taking earth for granted you

know now i guess it's paying us back

witches were once blamed for bad weather

and crop failures the severe conditions

and climate

brought about crop failure starvation

disease

death and social unrest doctor sally

balunis of the harvard smithsonian

center for astrophysics explained how

the severe conditions of the little ice

age in the middle ages

created a perfect atmosphere for

witchcraft trials

they said for a hundred years such a

storm had not been seen

the storm was deemed so unusual in this

period of superstition

that it had to be unnatural it had to be

supernatural

every night on the news now practically

is like a nature hike through the book

of revelation legal philosopher

john bowden in 1580 noted that

witchcraft

was the most terrible problem facing

humankind

again a very a very modern note no

challenge

poses a greater threat to future

generations than climate change

now there were skeptics who stood up but

they were often accused

of or threatened to be accused of

sorcery to squash any debate

when i tell environmental activists that

global warming itself is not something

to be concerned about

environmental activists attacked me any

feeble

notes of humane skepticism had to be

wrenched out of society

they shunned me and they

do not allow me to have my materials

published in their various magazines and

so on any country

which tolerates these skeptics will be

struck by plagues

famines and wars and many other

superstitions were common in other

cultures

in 1450 aztec priests encouraged people

to sacrifice blood to the gods to end

severe drought that decimated corn crops

they ended up sacrificing thousands of

people in a few weeks

in 1846 in australia aborigines blamed

the bad climate on the introduction of

the white man

in australia in 1933 syria banned the

yo-yo because they thought it caused

drought

during the 1940s some blame world war ii

for causing weather extremes global

warming

climate change global climate disruption

global weirding it's been called many

names

mobile weirding that's really what we're

gonna face what actually happens in

climate change is that the weather gets

weird

the hots get hotter the dries get drier

and longer and wider

the rains get heavier the snows get

thicker the weather

gets weird the continued identification

of

every severe weather event or forest

fire

or whatever with global warming hasn't

stopped

even though the ipcc itself found

very little linkage between human-caused

global warming and these extreme weather

events that doesn't seem to stop

the advocates who are continuing to use

science in a misleading way

in 2000 global warming activist michael

oppenheimer told the new york times

that he bought a sled for his daughter

but it's been sitting in the stairwell

and hasn't been used

snow is a thing of the past children

won't know what sledding is

what do the activists say when the snow

started piling up this is global warming

even though it's freezing right well and

that's that's why i don't like the

phrase global warming i like climate

change yeah it's going to get hot

but you're also going to have snow in

the summer in some places

every day we are getting new evidence of

the effects of man-made climate change

today the northeast plains and lower

midwest are digging out from another

round of snow and freezing rain

it's consistent with what you'd expect

the message went from global warming

causes less snow

to global warming causes more snow so

boston as of this point is

is in its number two snowiest winter

this is all part of climate change i

think it is

more snow less snow forest fires

increase forest fires decrease malaria

increase malaria decrease more fog less

fog

winter's warmer winter's colder so no

matter the outcome they can claim

they predicted it i tried to ask

oppenheimer about his sled comment in

given that this is the snowiest decade

ever recorded for the u.s

east coast according to meteorologist

joe deleo but my interview with

oppenheimer

was unexpectedly cut short two thousand

new york times you mentioned you bought

your daughter a sled but she hadn't been

able to use it

and then of course nowhere to find us

yes he does okay

all right well thank you perhaps next

time we can ask oppenheimer about his

daughter's sled

and just where is global warming hitting

the hardest

scientists called it ground zero for

climate change behind us

is really ground zero we're

ground zero for for climate change

florida's ground zero i've noticed in my

driving now that i've seen armadillos

places where i've never seen them before

much farther north than i've ever seen

them in the past

now let's go back and the same abc news

is touting the little armadillo as proof

yes you guessed it of global cooling

signs of cooling have already begun they

began about 1945

homely things like the flight of the

heat-loving armadillo from nebraska

to mexico the armadillo holds the

distinction of being used as evidence of

global cooling in the 1970s

and now is being used as evidence of

global warming

throughout history the sun the moon the

planets and the stars were often

considered

magical almost anything could be blamed

on the skies above

today it seems like almost anything can

be blamed on climate change

bad coffee crops armadillos migrating

north

or south tornadoes mummies decaying too

fast

these are the new measures of global

warming

as the science behind climate fairs

weaken activists are now realizing that

if you can't silence the message

silence the messenger now hansen has

gone even

further calling for the ceos of fossil

fuel companies

to be tried for crimes against humanity

they should be blamed

because they have

supported misinformation to the public

do i think they should be in jail i

think they should be enjoying

three hots and a cot at the hague with

all the other war criminals

i think it's treason i wish that there

were you could punish them under

every time you address the holocaust you

don't bring somebody in that says it

didn't happen

there were people saying don't worry

hitler is not real

it'll disappear i do think it's often a

mistake to call them climate skeptics

i think they're deniers just as i think

president ahmadinejad of iran who claims

not to believe that the holocaust

occurred

he knows it did and we're at that stage

now we have we have holocaust deniers we

have climate change deniers and to be

honest

there's a great deal of difference

they're almost like the ones who

still believe that the moon landing was

staged in a movie lot in arizona

but these tactics are creating quite a

backlash

what motivated you to finally speak up

anger

i was i was pretty angry the quotes were

asinine

has man been on the moon well uh

i helped get man on the moon so i know

that man has been on the moon

i mean i i'd happen to know that the

earth is round and

i was being insulted by people who knew

far less

about these things than i did and i

found that preposterous

and that's why i decided to start

speaking out it did not help me in the

least

it's only hurt me professionally and for

my career it's

but you can't you can't sit back and

take that kind of thing

either they ignore you or they ridicule

you and that's not the scientific method

and so this hate speech which is the one

thing the climate left

knows how to do is backfiring badly on

them now

far from being scared off more and more

prominent scientists are re-examining

the evidence about man-made global

warming

and are reversing their views many of

them politically left

former french party socialist member and

award-winning geophysicist dr claude

alegre was one of the first scientists

to warn about the dangers of global

warming

in a 1992 letter titled world scientist

warning to humanity but allegray took

another look at the evidence

and he has now reversed himself but

you're known here in france

for saying that climate change is not

man-made do you stand by that

that claim yeah absolutely the

co2 is in a in a very short proportion

in the inner atmosphere but my point is

nothing has proved this is man-made

climate change green guru and scientist

james lovelock was one of the leading

voices of man-made climate alarm

warming is much more than just a real

effect it's something deadly

that'll threaten nearly all of us anyone

with an imagination

can see the awful human consequences of

that

and we're talking about something which

is only about

30 years ahead like are you saying that

you're not saying the entire human race

will be wiped out but you're saying

happens no

no but a significant number you're not

talking about a party here

i'm afraid so as many as seven out of

eight

are likely to be wiped out yes but

lovelock has now turned his back on

man-made global warming fairs

and has grown steadily more skeptical it

hasn't

actually happened as predicted has it no

it hasn't

and it's very interesting because

most of us in the in what you might call

the earth science game climate science

as well

and i was one of them i think made quite

a big mistake

we all thought we knew how carbon

dioxide in the air

and climate were related i would say

since 2004 i've been very lonely mark

i've been lonely working on the hill for

the democratic party climate statistics

professor dr caleb rossiter of american

university

is an outspoken anti-war activist who

has a flawless progressive record

climate justice in limiting carbon

dioxide emissions

is a crime against africa and it's what

motivated me

to get involved again in this debate but

teaching statistics they have to get a

peer-reviewed article

one of them happened to pick an ipcc

approved

peer-reviewed article that said we can

attribute most of the warming in the

last

50 years to carbon dioxide and she's

writing her paper

that settles it i said no that opens it

and she said

come on dr rossiter let's sit down and

look at the article together

and in fact the article had absolutely

no proof it just said that this is our

model and this is what we do

so i raised her grade a little bit to

say well you did report what they've

said

but i can't give you a very good grade

because you haven't dug into it and

realized

there's no basis here for making the

statement i have been

concerned about global warming since

and in the 1980s it looked like the

weight of evidence went

towards human induced significant to a

significant

extent and since then it's moved against

it

the evidence has switched from the

mid-1980s

to now it's a much weaker case that

there's human-induced

significant global warming even if all

the climate models were true

climate change is not an existential

threat we've been through much much

worse

than climate control of this dr richard

tall is a lead author for the un climate

panel

and a professor at the uk's university

of sussex

toll had his name removed from the ipcc

summary for policy makers report in 2014

due to what he considered distortions of

science there's a lot of people who did

not volunteer knowing full well what the

ipcc is like

so it's not an open process at all my

position on this

has evolved over time climatologist dr

judith curry is the former chair of the

school of earth and atmospheric sciences

at the georgia institute of technology

if you want to put a date on you know a

big sea change in my position regarding

the ipcc well

it was the period late 2009

again it was triggered by the

climategate emails

a scandal called climategate a scandal

involving

some stolen emails the language in the

email suggests

these scientists manipulated their

findings i was extremely concerned by

those

i thought it did not reflect the kind of

behavior

all sorts of things that i was concerned

about trying to keep

data away from people who are trying to

get the data

i mean to me that was

you know something that absolutely

they should absolutely have been making

the data available when somebody comes

along and wants the data

by the time you get to late spring of

i had been ostracized by the mainstream

the consensus

and had really been

pushed over to the other side if you

will by

attacks for greenpeace which i was

involved in the beginning of it was

the threat of all-out nuclear war we

cared about humans because

our focus was to stop nuclear war in the

destruction of human civilization

that's the piece in greenpeace the green

part of course is nature

and over the years gradually greenpeace

lost the peace part

and drifted into a position of depicting

humans as the enemies of the earth

and in 1986 i left to become an

independent environmentalist

basing my positions on science and logic

rather than sensationalism

misinformation

and fear there is no scientific proof

that human emissions of carbon dioxide

are the dominant cause of the minor

warming of the earth's atmosphere over

the past 100 years

it's actually not very much about the

science it's always been about

economic and political choice i come

from the left wing politically

climate science and these costs are

sub-prime

science sub-prime

economics and above all sub-prime

politics but it is as much

psychological and social a phenomenon as

anything else

another politically left scientist to

bail out of the global warming movement

is physicist dr dennis rancourt rancourt

is a former professor and environmental

science researcher

at the university of ottawa if you want

to be an environmentalist if you're

really concerned about saving the boreal

forest and

habitat destruction and so on then fight

against habitat destruction

don't go off into this tenuous thing

about co2 concentration in the

atmosphere there was

a epiphany

for me in the early 90s i became

skeptical then but i didn't do anything

i started to write a book on the

humongous impact

that earth's old co2 levels used to have

after about four months i said leighton

you are the dumbest researcher on earth

you're not finding any evidence of the

humongous impact that co2 had on earth's

old climate

because the correlations weren't that

good i think it's the damn catastrophe

that people are being misled on this

issue let's give this global warming

nonsense

it's waterloo tonight i recently was

contacted by somebody out of the blue

who said i've seen the attacks on you

you know they say you claim to be a

member of the house of lords when you're

not

and they said we can see from the

hysterical tone of what is being said

that these people are not right and that

was our first clue that you were right

dr ivar giavere is a nobel prize winning

physicist who was one of president

obama's key scientific supporters in

but a few years later giaver publicly

announced his dissent

on man-made global warming i don't see

that the co2

is the cause of all this problem i

resigned from the american physical

society

because this statement energy is

incontrovertible

that's a religion that's religious

statement

climate has become a new religion and

that people who disagree would be

treated as heretics

the title was climate heretic

judith curry turns on her colleagues

and so i responded

with a rather blistering blog post

and the punchline of that is that if

ipcc is dog mud then count me in as a

heretic

i was sort of booted out of the tribe if

you will

when my think tank announced that they

were going to start a climate divestment

campaign i wrote a very long memo

back to the director explaining why i

thought this was a terrible idea

we need to stop and look at the data i

want to have a debate with the staff and

the board

and he said no we we know your views

caleb so it's because

i could not reach the board and them

directly that i wrote the piece for the

wall street journal

two days later i was handed my walking

papers from a 23-year association with

that think-tank

they felt it was best that i be

terminated because my views on

african development and climate change

and climate justice were divergent

from theirs so i'm willing to express my

opinions

and have them come out this is the first

time i've expressed an opinion that was

alien

to the left it is a convergence of

interests of powerful elites

including the media who want sensation

the environmental movement who want

donations

the politicians who want appear to be

saving the world

the businesses who want to look green

the academics and universities that want

public money

for grants to study this

so let's review some of what we've seen

because there's certainly no shortage of

claims that man-made global warming will

result

in an ecological disaster with the

world's very survival at stake

the evidence for this claim is severely

lacking by virtually every measure from

global temperatures and climate model

predictions to polar bears sea level

rise and extreme weather events

the claims of climate fair promoters are

either falling short

or going in the opposite direction then

there's a claim that rising levels of

carbon dioxide are a major threat facing

humanity

scientists point to geological data that

shows co2 and temperature

are not in lockstep and co2 is drowned

out by

many many other variables we've even

looked back and forth at the history of

climate change claims

we've seen scientific consensus move

from a coming ice age to a boiling

planet

and we've discovered that throughout

history concerns about the weather have

been used to generate

fear and manipulate the public

we've examined the claims that an

overwhelming scientific consensus exists

for man-made global warming

the oft-repeated notion that 97 of

scientists

agree we've shown that this alleged

consensus

is merely an illusion carefully crafted

by what amounts to an ideological effort

to promote global warming fares in their

so-called solutions

and we've shown that an increasing

number of prestigious scientists are

re-examining the evidence

and are challenging the climate claims

being put forth by the united nations al

gore and climate activists

and being hyped by the mainstream media

we've seen a lot

but we've not seen all the cards just

yet because there's still

one more deck one more deck to explain

much of what's behind the global warming

movement

in our next film we will complete the

picture of the climate change grand

narrative and the agenda behind it

outrage growing over the co-chair of a

un

climate change panel saying this one

must say clearly that we redistribute

the world's wealth by climate policy one

of the ways it will drive the change is

through

global governance and global agreements

we will look at the financing of the

climate establishment and the big green

movement

behind it it is absolutely true that the

money available for global warming

statements and research is driving

academia right now and people

line up together the sierra club took 26

million from natural gas

and michael has the audacity to try to

imply that skeptics are fossil fuel

funded you also had a financial interest

given that a quarter million dollars

came from hollywood barbra streisand to

fund you we will expose the hypocrisy of

many of the politicians hollywood

celebrities and other top climate

campaigners

for instance did you know that just air

drying your clothes for six months

per person saves 700 pounds of carbon

dioxide

people will criticize leonardo dicaprio

who's made comments like i'll fly around

the world to fight global warming

they'll criticize al gore

because of their carbon footprints and

lifestyle does that take are they the

best spokesman

my brother that is such a uh obligatory

yeah that's a question that you

shouldn't be asking here today

because that that defies the spirit of

what this is about

so anyone who attacks leonardo dicaprio

is either a coward or an idiolog

we'll look at how kids are being fed

climate fears from a very young age

global warming

30 years that won't affect me

please help the world like getting your

dad to insulate the loft or

taking your next holiday by train

instead of flying

or buying energy saving light bulbs now

no pressure at all but it'd be great to

get a sense of how many of you might do

this just a rough percentage

that's fantastic and there's not

philip and tracy that's fine that's

absolutely fine

your own choice okay class thank you so

much for today

oh just before you go i just need to

press

this little button here

now everybody please remember to read

chapters five

and six on volcanoes and glaciation we

will look at some of the well

odd solutions to global warming maybe

things like hygiene

where we've now normalized showering

every day sometimes twice a day

that means we have to wash our [ __ ]

change our clothes every day

they've called for quote radical and

immediate de-growth strategies in the us

we need a radical almost overnight

change the only way

to to stop runaway climate change

is to terminate industrial civilization

and some other solutions that are just

plain terrifying you're not endorsing

dismantling physically uh violation of

the law or any kind of eco-terrorism are

you

it depends on the circumstances

it's a possibility means necessary we

mean by any means necessary

we would support it i call this human

engineering

and what it involves is the bio

biomedical modification

of human beings we can make humans

smaller

so reducing the average height in the

u.s by

just 15 centimeters for example would

mean a mass reduction of 20

23 for men and 25 for women

with a corresponding reduction of the

metabolic weight of 15 to 18 percent

obviously less people would exert less

pressure on the natural resources and

making fertility management

ubiquitously available because we are

already today already exceeding the

planetary

carrying capacity africa is projected to

have more people

than china or india by mid-century more

than china and india combined by the end

of the century

and this is one of the causal factors

that must be

addressed we reveal how new global

warming based energy restrictions are

leading the world into

energy poverty

and finally we'll take a detailed look

at how the so-called climate change

solutions

will not only impact the world's

economic health but will have

devastating impacts on the world's poor

who struggle to survive without running

water or electricity

there's over a billion people in this

world with no electricity

the effort to fight global warming by

reducing co2 emissions

by reducing our use of fossil fuels

harms

the poor around the world more than

anybody else we're being asked to spend

50 billion dollars a year

to have no impact on global climate

that i think is unconscionable morally

thanks for watching and i look forward

to seeing you for our next film

this is mark morano and i hope you will

start asking hard questions and

examining the evidence about global

warming fears for yourself

the planet's warming

in the streets causing quite a sensation

a message being preached by the united

nations that the polar cap is melting

like

it's covered with salt and then they'll

all tell you it's america's fault so

all the so-called experts feel they

should warn you

the temperature is higher in california

they say there's lots of global warming

in every town

and you believe the experts and we're

all gonna drown

but global warming is just a bunch of

hot air don't

care

you