- il y a 2 heures
Catégorie
🎥
Court métrageTranscription
00:00:00Sous-titrage Société Radio-Canada
00:00:30Each day, the news reports grow more fantastically apocalyptic.
00:00:35Politicians no longer dare to express any doubt about climate change.
00:00:39There is such intolerance of any dissenting voice.
00:00:44Are some of the worst climate criminals on the planet?
00:00:48This is the most politically incorrect thing possible,
00:00:51is to doubt this climate change orthodoxy.
00:00:55Global warming has gone beyond politics.
00:00:58It is a new kind of morality.
00:01:00Now, the Prime Minister is back from his holidays,
00:01:02unrepentant and unembarrassed about yet another long-haul destination.
00:01:09Yet, as the frenzy of a man-made global warming grows shriller,
00:01:13many senior climate scientists say the actual scientific basis for the theory is crumbling.
00:01:19There were periods, for example, in Earth's history when we had three times as much CO2 as we have today,
00:01:24or periods when we had ten times as much CO2 as we have today.
00:01:27And if CO2 has a large effect on climate, then you should see it in the temperature reconstruction.
00:01:33If we look at climate through the geological time frame,
00:01:36we would never suspect CO2 as a major climate driver.
00:01:40None of the major climate changes in the last thousand years can be explained by CO2.
00:01:47We can't say that CO2 will drive climate.
00:01:50It certainly never did in the past.
00:01:53I've often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue
00:01:58and that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system.
00:02:02Well, I am one scientist, and there are many that simply think that is not true.
00:02:06Man-made global warming is no ordinary scientific theory.
00:02:10This morning, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made up...
00:02:13It is presented in the media as having the stamp of authority of an impressive international organization.
00:02:18From the IPCC...
00:02:19The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC.
00:02:25The IPCC, like any UN body, is political.
00:02:29The final conclusions are politically driven.
00:02:33This claim that the IPCC is the world's top 1,500 or 2,500 scientists,
00:02:42you look at the bibliographies of the people and it's simply not true.
00:02:45There are quite a number of non-scientists.
00:02:48And to build the number up to 2,500, they have to start taking reviewers and government people and so
00:02:54on,
00:02:54anyone who ever came close to them.
00:02:56And none of them are asked to agree.
00:03:00Many of them disagree.
00:03:01Those people who are specialists but don't agree with the polemic and resign,
00:03:07and there have been a number that I know of, they are simply put on the author list and become
00:03:13part of this 2,500 of the world's top scientists.
00:03:16People have decided you have to convince other people that since no scientist disagrees, you shouldn't disagree either.
00:03:24But that, whenever you hear that in science, that's pure propaganda.
00:03:29This is the story of how a theory about climate turned into a political ideology.
00:03:36See, I don't even like to call it the environmental movement anymore,
00:03:39because really it is a political activist movement,
00:03:41and they have become hugely influential at a global level.
00:03:47It is the story of the distortion of a whole area of science.
00:03:52Climate scientists need there to be a problem in order to get funding.
00:03:56We have a vested interest in creating panic,
00:04:00because then money will flow to climate science.
00:04:04There's one thing you shouldn't say,
00:04:06and that is, this might not be a problem.
00:04:10It is the story of how a political campaign turned into a bureaucratic bandwagon.
00:04:16The fact of the matter is that tens of thousands of jobs depend upon global warming right now.
00:04:23It's a big business.
00:04:25It's become a great industry in itself.
00:04:30And if the whole global warming farrago collapsed,
00:04:34there'd be an awful lot of people out of jobs and looking for work.
00:04:39This is a story of censorship and intimidation.
00:04:43I have seen and heard their spitting fury at anybody who might disagree with them,
00:04:51which is not the scientific way.
00:04:55It is a story about Westerners invoking the threat of climatic disaster
00:04:59to hinder vital industrial progress in the developing world.
00:05:03One clear thing that emerges from the whole environmental debate
00:05:08is the point that there's somebody keen to kill the African dream,
00:05:14and the African dream is to develop.
00:05:17The environmental movement has evolved into the strongest force there is
00:05:22for preventing development in the developing countries.
00:05:28The global warming story is a cautionary tale
00:05:32of how a media scare became the defining idea of a generation.
00:05:37The whole global warming business has become like a religion.
00:05:42And people who disagree are called heretics.
00:06:01In 2005, a House of Lords inquiry was set up to examine
00:06:05the scientific evidence of man-made global warming.
00:06:08A leading figure in that inquiry was Lord Lawson of Blaby,
00:06:12who, as Chancellor of the Exchequer in the 1980s,
00:06:15was the first politician to commit government money to global warming research.
00:06:20We had a very, very thorough inquiry,
00:06:23took evidence from a whole lot of people,
00:06:26experts in this area, and produced a report.
00:06:29What surprised me was to discover
00:06:31how weak and uncertain the science was.
00:06:35In fact, there are more and more thoughtful people,
00:06:38some of them a little bit frightened to come out in the open,
00:06:42but who quietly, privately, and some of them publicly,
00:06:45are saying, hang on, wait a minute,
00:06:47this simply doesn't add up.
00:06:50We are told that the Earth's climate is changing.
00:06:56But the Earth's climate is always changing.
00:07:00In Earth's long history, there have been countless periods
00:07:03when it was much warmer and much cooler than it is today,
00:07:07when much of the world was covered by tropical forests,
00:07:10or else vast ice sheets.
00:07:12The climate has always changed,
00:07:14and changed without any help from us humans.
00:07:18We can trace the present warming trend back at least 200 years,
00:07:23to the end of a very cold period in Earth's history.
00:07:26This cold spell is known to climatologists as the Little Ice Age.
00:07:31Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow.
00:07:34It doesn't show signs of stopping.
00:07:37In the 14th century, Europe plunged into the Little Ice Age,
00:07:41and where we would look for evidence of this
00:07:44are the old illustrations and prints and pictures of Old Father Thames.
00:07:51Because during the hardest and toughest winters of that Little Ice Age,
00:07:56the Thames would freeze over.
00:07:58And there were wonderful ice fairs held on the Thames,
00:08:03skating and people actually selling things on the ice.
00:08:09If we look back further in time, before the Little Ice Age,
00:08:13we find a balmy golden era,
00:08:15when temperatures were higher than they are today,
00:08:17a time known to climatologists as the medieval warm period.
00:08:27It's important that people know that climate enabled
00:08:31a quite different lifestyle in the medieval period.
00:08:36We have this view today that warming is going to have apocalyptic outcomes.
00:08:42In fact, wherever you describe this warm period,
00:08:45it appears to be associated with riches.
00:08:49In Europe, this was the Great Age of the Cathedral Builders,
00:08:53a time when, according to Chaucer,
00:08:56vineyards flourished even in the north of England.
00:08:58All over the city of London,
00:09:00there are little memories of the vineyards
00:09:03that grew in the medieval warm period.
00:09:07So this was a wonderfully rich time.
00:09:10And this little church, in a sense, symbolised it,
00:09:13because it comes from a period of great wealth.
00:09:16Going back in time further still,
00:09:18before the medieval warm period,
00:09:21we find more warm spells,
00:09:22including a very prolonged period during the Bronze Age,
00:09:26known to geologists as the Holocene Maximum,
00:09:29when temperatures were significantly higher than they are now
00:09:32for more than three millennia.
00:09:34If we go back 8,000 years in the Holocene period,
00:09:38our current interglacial,
00:09:39it was much warmer than it is today.
00:09:41Now, the polar bears obviously survived that period.
00:09:45They're with us today.
00:09:46They are very adaptable,
00:09:47and these warm periods in the past,
00:09:49what we call hypsy thermals,
00:09:52pose no problem for them.
00:09:55Climate variation in the past is clearly natural.
00:09:59So why do we think it's any different today?
00:10:03In the current alarm about global warming,
00:10:06the culprit is industrial society.
00:10:09Thanks to modern industry,
00:10:11luxuries once enjoyed exclusively by the rich
00:10:13are now available in abundance to ordinary people.
00:10:16Novel technologies have made life easier and richer.
00:10:20Modern transport and communications
00:10:21have made the world seem less foreign and distant.
00:10:24industrial progress has changed our lives.
00:10:28But has it also changed the climate?
00:10:31According to the theory of man-made global warming,
00:10:34industrial growth should cause the temperature to rise.
00:10:38But does it?
00:10:39Anyone who goes around and says that
00:10:42carbon dioxide is responsible for most of the warming
00:10:46of the 20th century hasn't looked at the basic numbers.
00:10:53Industrial production in the early decades of the 20th century
00:10:57was still in its infancy,
00:10:59restricted to only a few countries,
00:11:01handicapped by war and economic depression.
00:11:05After the Second World War, things changed.
00:11:07Consumer goods like refrigerators and washing machines
00:11:10and TVs and cars
00:11:12began to be mass-produced for an international market.
00:11:16Historians call this global explosion of industrial activity
00:11:19the post-war economic boom.
00:11:22So how does the industrial story compare with the temperature record?
00:11:27Since the mid-19th century,
00:11:29the Earth's temperature has risen by just over half a degree Celsius.
00:11:34But this warming began long before cars and planes were even invented.
00:11:40What's more, most of the rise in temperature occurred before 1940,
00:11:45during a period when industrial production was relatively insignificant.
00:11:50After the Second World War, during the post-war economic boom,
00:11:54temperatures, in theory, should have shot up.
00:11:57But they didn't.
00:11:58They fell.
00:11:59Not for one or two years, but for four decades.
00:12:03In fact, paradoxically,
00:12:05it wasn't until the world economic recession in the 1970s
00:12:08that they stopped falling.
00:12:11CO2 began to increase exponentially in about 1940.
00:12:17But the temperature actually began to decrease 1940,
00:12:23continued to about 1975.
00:12:26So this is the opposite relation.
00:12:29When the CO2 is increasing rapidly,
00:12:33but yet the temperature is decreasing,
00:12:35then we cannot say that CO2 and the temperature go together.
00:12:40Temperature went up significantly up to 1940,
00:12:43when human production of CO2 was relatively low.
00:12:47And then in the post-war years,
00:12:49when industry and the whole economies of the world really got going,
00:12:53and human production of CO2 just soared,
00:12:55the global temperature was going down.
00:12:57In other words, the facts didn't fit the theory.
00:13:02Just at a time when, after the Second World War,
00:13:05industry was booming,
00:13:06carbon dioxide was increasing,
00:13:09and yet the Earth was getting cooler
00:13:12and starting off scares of a coming ice age,
00:13:15it made absolutely no sense.
00:13:18It still doesn't make sense.
00:13:21Why do we suppose that carbon dioxide
00:13:23is responsible for our changing climate?
00:13:28CO2 forms only a very small part of the Earth's atmosphere.
00:13:32In fact, we measure changes in the level of atmospheric CO2
00:13:35in tens of parts per million.
00:13:39If you take CO2 as a percentage of all the gases in the atmosphere,
00:13:43the oxygen, the nitrogen, and argon, and so on,
00:13:45it's 0.054%.
00:13:48It's an incredibly small portion.
00:13:51And then, of course, you've got to take that portion
00:13:53that supposedly humans are adding,
00:13:55which is the focus of all the concern,
00:13:58and it gets even smaller.
00:13:59Although CO2 is a greenhouse gas,
00:14:02greenhouse gases themselves only form a small part of the atmosphere.
00:14:06What's more, CO2 is a relatively minor greenhouse gas.
00:14:09The atmosphere is made up of a multitude of gases.
00:14:13A small percentage of them we call greenhouse gases.
00:14:17And of that very small percentage of greenhouse gases,
00:14:2095% of it is water vapor.
00:14:22It's the most important greenhouse gas.
00:14:24Water vapor is a greenhouse gas,
00:14:26by far the most important greenhouse gas.
00:14:30So is there any way of checking whether the recent warming
00:14:32was due to an increase in greenhouse gas?
00:14:36There is only one way to tell,
00:14:38and that is to look up in the sky,
00:14:40or a part of the sky known to scientists as the troposphere.
00:14:46If it's greenhouse warming,
00:14:48you get more warming in the middle of the troposphere,
00:14:52the first 10, 12 kilometers of the atmosphere,
00:14:55than you do at the surface.
00:14:56There are good theoretical reasons for that,
00:15:00having to do with how the greenhouse works.
00:15:03The greenhouse effect works like this.
00:15:05The sun sends its heat down to Earth.
00:15:08If it weren't for greenhouse gases,
00:15:10this solar radiation would bounce back into space,
00:15:12leaving the planet cold and uninhabitable.
00:15:16Greenhouse gas traps the escaping heat in the Earth's troposphere,
00:15:19a few miles above the surface.
00:15:21And it's here, according to the climate models,
00:15:24that the rate of warming should be highest.
00:15:26If it's greenhouse gas that's causing it.
00:15:31All the models, every one of them,
00:15:33calculates that the warming should be faster
00:15:36as you go up from the surface into the atmosphere.
00:15:42And, in fact, the maximum warming over the equator should take place at an altitude of about 10 kilometers.
00:15:51A scientist largely responsible for measuring the temperature in the Earth's atmosphere is Professor John Christie.
00:15:59In 1991, he was awarded NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement.
00:16:04And in 1996, received a special award from the American Meteorological Society
00:16:09for fundamentally advancing our ability to monitor climate.
00:16:16He was a lead author on the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC.
00:16:26There are two ways to take the temperature in the Earth's atmosphere,
00:16:30satellites and weather balloons.
00:16:35What we found consistently is that in a great part of the planet,
00:16:41that the bulk of the atmosphere is not warming as much as we see at the surface in this region.
00:16:46And that's a real head-scratcher for us,
00:16:48because the theory is pretty straightforward.
00:16:52And the theory says that if the surface warms,
00:16:55the upper atmosphere should warm rapidly.
00:16:58The rise in temperature of that part of the atmosphere is not very dramatic at all
00:17:03and really does not match the theory that climate models are expressing at this point.
00:17:10One of the problems that is plaguing the models
00:17:12is that they predict that as you go up through the atmosphere,
00:17:16except in the polar regions,
00:17:17that the rate of warming increases.
00:17:20And it's quite clear from two data sets,
00:17:23not just satellite data, which everybody talks about,
00:17:25but from weather balloon data,
00:17:27that you don't see that effect.
00:17:31In fact, it looks like the surface temperatures
00:17:33are warming slightly more than the upper air temperatures.
00:17:36That's a big difference.
00:17:38That data gives you a handle on the fact
00:17:41that what you're seeing is warming
00:17:43that probably is not due to greenhouse gases.
00:17:47That is, the observations do not show an increase with altitude.
00:17:51In fact, most observations show a slight decrease
00:17:54in the rate of warming with altitude.
00:17:57So in a sense, you can say
00:17:59that the hypothesis of man-made global warming
00:18:03is falsified by the evidence.
00:18:09So the recent warming of the Earth
00:18:10happened in the wrong place and at the wrong time.
00:18:14Most of the warming took place in the early part of the 20th century
00:18:17and occurred mostly at the Earth's surface,
00:18:19the very opposite of what should have happened
00:18:22according to the theory of man-made global warming.
00:18:26I am Al Gore.
00:18:28I used to be the next president of the United States of America.
00:18:32Former Vice President Al Gore's emotional film,
00:18:35An Inconvenient Truth,
00:18:37is regarded by many as the definitive popular presentation
00:18:40of the theory of man-made global warming.
00:18:43His argument rests on one all-important piece of evidence
00:18:47taken from ice core surveys
00:18:49in which scientists drilled deep into the ice
00:18:52to look back into Earth's climate history
00:18:54hundreds of thousands of years.
00:18:56The first ice core survey took place in Vostok in the Antarctic.
00:19:01What it found, as Al Gore correctly points out,
00:19:04was a clear correlation between carbon dioxide and temperature.
00:19:09We're going back in time now, 650,000 years.
00:19:12Here's what the temperature has been on our Earth.
00:19:17Now, one thing that kind of jumps out at you is,
00:19:20did they ever fit together?
00:19:24Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
00:19:26The relationship is actually very complicated,
00:19:29but there is one relationship
00:19:31that is far more powerful than all the others,
00:19:34and it is this.
00:19:34When there is more carbon dioxide,
00:19:37the temperature gets warmer.
00:19:39Al Gore says the relationship
00:19:41between temperature and CO2 is complicated,
00:19:43but he doesn't say what those complications are.
00:19:47In fact, there was something very important
00:19:49in the ice core data that he failed to mention.
00:19:53Professor Ian Clark
00:19:54is a leading Arctic paleoclimatologist
00:19:56who looks back into the Earth's temperature record
00:19:59tens of millions of years.
00:20:01When we look at climate on long scales,
00:20:04we're looking for geological material
00:20:06that actually records climate.
00:20:08If we were to take an ice sample, for example,
00:20:10we use isotopes to reconstruct temperature,
00:20:12but the atmosphere that's imprisoned in that ice,
00:20:16we liberate, and then we look at the CO2 content.
00:20:19Professor Clark and others have indeed discovered,
00:20:22as Al Gore says,
00:20:23a link between carbon dioxide and temperature.
00:20:27But what Al Gore doesn't say
00:20:29is that the link is the wrong way round.
00:20:32So here we're looking at the ice core record from Vostok,
00:20:36and in the red we see temperature going up
00:20:39from early time to later time
00:20:41at a very key interval
00:20:42when we came out of a glaciation.
00:20:44And we see the temperature going up,
00:20:47and then we see the CO2 coming up.
00:20:51CO2 lags behind that increase.
00:20:53It's got an 800-year lag,
00:20:55so temperature is leading CO2 by 800 years.
00:20:59There have now been several major ice core surveys.
00:21:03Every one of them shows the same thing.
00:21:06The temperature rises or falls,
00:21:08and then, after a few hundred years,
00:21:10carbon dioxide follows.
00:21:12So obviously,
00:21:14carbon dioxide is not the cause of that warming.
00:21:18In fact, we can say that the warming
00:21:20produced the increase in carbon dioxide.
00:21:23CO2 clearly cannot be causing temperature changes.
00:21:27It's a product of temperature.
00:21:29It's following temperature changes.
00:21:31The ice core record
00:21:33goes to the very heart of the problem we have here.
00:21:37They said,
00:21:38if the CO2 increases in the atmosphere
00:21:41as a greenhouse gas,
00:21:42then the temperature will go up.
00:21:43But the ice core record shows exactly the opposite.
00:21:47So the fundamental assumption,
00:21:50the most fundamental assumption
00:21:51of the whole theory of climate change
00:21:53due to humans,
00:21:55is shown to be wrong.
00:21:58But how can it be
00:21:59that higher temperatures
00:22:00lead to more CO2 in the atmosphere?
00:22:03To understand this,
00:22:05we must first restate the obvious point,
00:22:07that carbon dioxide is a natural gas
00:22:09produced by all living things.
00:22:12A few things annoy me more
00:22:14than to hear people talking about carbon dioxide
00:22:17as being a pollutant.
00:22:21You're made of carbon dioxide.
00:22:23I'm made of carbon dioxide.
00:22:24Carbon dioxide is how living things grow.
00:22:28What's more,
00:22:29humans are not the main source of carbon dioxide.
00:22:33Humans produce a small fraction
00:22:36in the single digits, percentage-wise,
00:22:38of the CO2 that is produced in the atmosphere.
00:22:42Volcanoes produce more CO2 each year
00:22:45than all the factories and cars and planes
00:22:47and other sources of man-made carbon dioxide
00:22:49put together.
00:22:51More still comes from animals and bacteria,
00:22:54which produce about 150 gigatons of CO2 each year,
00:22:57compared to a mere 6.5 gigatons from humans.
00:23:00An even larger source of CO2 is dying vegetation,
00:23:05from falling leaves, for example, in the autumn.
00:23:07But the biggest source of CO2 by far is the oceans.
00:23:17Carl Wunsch is Professor of Oceanography at MIT.
00:23:20He was also Visiting Professor in Oceanography
00:23:23at Harvard University and University College London,
00:23:26and a Senior Visiting Fellow in Mathematics and Physics
00:23:28at the University of Cambridge.
00:23:31He is the author of four major textbooks on oceanography.
00:23:35The ocean is the major reservoir
00:23:38into which carbon dioxide goes
00:23:41when it comes out of the atmosphere
00:23:43or from which it is re-emitted to the atmosphere.
00:23:49If you heat the surface of the ocean,
00:23:52it tends to emit carbon dioxide.
00:23:55So similarly, if you cool the ocean surface,
00:23:59the ocean can dissolve more carbon dioxide.
00:24:04So the warmer the oceans,
00:24:06the more carbon dioxide they produce,
00:24:08and the cooler they are, the more they suck in.
00:24:10But why is there a time lag of hundreds of years
00:24:13between a change in temperature
00:24:14and a change in the amount of carbon dioxide
00:24:17going into or out of the sea?
00:24:20The reason is that oceans are so big and so deep,
00:24:24they take literally hundreds of years
00:24:26to warm up and cool down.
00:24:29This time lag means the oceans have
00:24:31of what scientists call
00:24:33a memory of temperature changes.
00:24:35The ocean has a memory of past events
00:24:39running out as far as 10,000 years.
00:24:44So, for example, if somebody says,
00:24:46oh, I'm seeing changes in the North Atlantic,
00:24:49this must mean that the climate system is changing.
00:24:53It may only mean that something happened
00:24:55in a remote part of the ocean
00:24:57decades or hundreds of years ago,
00:24:59whose effects are now beginning to show up
00:25:02in the North Atlantic.
00:25:03The current warming began long before people
00:25:06had cars or electric lights.
00:25:08In the past 150 years,
00:25:10the temperature has risen just over half a degree Celsius.
00:25:13But most of that rise occurred before 1940.
00:25:17Since that time,
00:25:19the temperature has fallen for four decades
00:25:21and risen for three.
00:25:23There is no evidence at all
00:25:25from Earth's long climate history
00:25:27that carbon dioxide
00:25:28has ever determined global temperatures.
00:25:31But if CO2 doesn't drive Earth's climate,
00:25:35what does?
00:25:42The common belief
00:25:43that carbon dioxide is driving climate change
00:25:46is at odds
00:25:47with much of the available scientific data.
00:25:50Data from weather balloons and satellites,
00:25:53from ice core surveys
00:25:54and from the historical temperature records.
00:25:58But if CO2 isn't driving climate,
00:26:01what is?
00:26:05Isn't it bizarre
00:26:06to think that it's humans,
00:26:08you know,
00:26:08when we're filling up our car,
00:26:09turning on our lights,
00:26:11that we're the ones controlling climate?
00:26:14Just look in the sky.
00:26:15Look at that massive thing,
00:26:18the sun.
00:26:20Even humans,
00:26:21at our present six and a half billion,
00:26:24are minute relative to that.
00:26:29In the late 1980s,
00:26:31solar physicist Piers Corbin
00:26:32decided to try a radically new way
00:26:35of forecasting the weather.
00:26:37Despite the huge resources
00:26:38of the official Met Office,
00:26:40Corbin's new technique
00:26:41consistently produced
00:26:43more accurate results.
00:26:45He was hailed in the national press
00:26:46as a super weatherman.
00:26:49The secret of his success
00:26:51was the sun.
00:26:54The origin of our solar weather technique
00:26:56of long-range forecasting
00:26:58came originally
00:26:59from study of sunspots
00:27:01and a desire to predict those.
00:27:02And then I realised
00:27:03it was actually much more interesting
00:27:05to use the sun
00:27:06to predict the weather.
00:27:14Sunspots,
00:27:15we now know,
00:27:16are intense magnetic fields
00:27:18which appear at times
00:27:19of higher solar activity.
00:27:22But for many hundreds of years,
00:27:24long before this
00:27:24was properly understood,
00:27:26astronomers around the world
00:27:27used to count the number
00:27:29of sunspots
00:27:30in the belief
00:27:30that more spots
00:27:32heralded warmer weather.
00:27:35In 1893,
00:27:36the British astronomer
00:27:37Edward Maunder
00:27:38observed that during
00:27:39the Little Ice Age,
00:27:41there were barely any spots
00:27:42visible on the sun,
00:27:44a period of solar inactivity
00:27:46which became known
00:27:47as the Maunder Minimum.
00:27:49But how reliable
00:27:50are sunspots
00:27:51as an indicator
00:27:52of the weather?
00:27:53OK, bye.
00:27:55I decided to test it
00:27:57by gambling on the weather
00:27:58through William Hill
00:27:59against what the Met Office
00:28:01said was a,
00:28:02you know,
00:28:02a normal expectation.
00:28:04And I won money
00:28:06month after month
00:28:07after month
00:28:08after month.
00:28:09Last winter,
00:28:10the Met Office said
00:28:11it could be,
00:28:12or would be,
00:28:13an exceptionally cold winter.
00:28:15We said,
00:28:16no,
00:28:16that is nonsense,
00:28:17it's going to be
00:28:17very close to normal.
00:28:19And we specifically said
00:28:20when it would be cold,
00:28:22i.e. after Christmas
00:28:23and February.
00:28:24We were right,
00:28:25they were wrong.
00:28:26In 1991,
00:28:28senior scientists
00:28:29at the Danish
00:28:30Meteorological Institute
00:28:31decided to compile
00:28:32a record of sunspots
00:28:33in the 20th century
00:28:35and compare it
00:28:36with the temperature record.
00:28:38What they found
00:28:39was an incredibly
00:28:40close correlation
00:28:41between what the sun
00:28:42was doing
00:28:43and changes
00:28:44in temperature
00:28:45on Earth.
00:28:47Solar activity,
00:28:48they found,
00:28:49rose sharply
00:28:50to 1940,
00:28:51fell back
00:28:52for four decades
00:28:53until the 1970s,
00:28:55and then rose again
00:28:56after that.
00:29:00When we saw
00:29:01this correlation
00:29:03between the temperature
00:29:04and solar activity
00:29:06or sunspot cycle links,
00:29:08then people said to us,
00:29:10OK,
00:29:11it can be just
00:29:11a coincidence.
00:29:12So how can we
00:29:14prove that
00:29:15it's not just
00:29:15a coincidence?
00:29:16Well,
00:29:17one obvious thing
00:29:18is to have
00:29:19a longer time series
00:29:20or a different time series.
00:29:21Then we went
00:29:22back in time.
00:29:24So Professor
00:29:25Fries Christensen
00:29:26and his colleagues
00:29:27examined 400 years
00:29:28of astronomical records
00:29:30to compare
00:29:31sunspot activity
00:29:32against temperature
00:29:33variation.
00:29:35Once again,
00:29:36they found that
00:29:36variations in
00:29:37solar activity
00:29:38were intimately linked
00:29:40to temperature
00:29:41variation on Earth.
00:29:42It was the sun,
00:29:44it seemed,
00:29:45not carbon dioxide
00:29:46or anything else,
00:29:47that was driving
00:29:48changes in the climate.
00:29:50In a way,
00:29:51it's not surprising.
00:29:52The sun affects us
00:29:53directly, of course,
00:29:55when it sends down
00:29:56its heat.
00:29:57But we now know
00:29:58the sun also affects us
00:29:59indirectly
00:30:00through clouds.
00:30:04Clouds have a powerful
00:30:05cooling effect,
00:30:06but how are they formed?
00:30:07In the early 20th century,
00:30:09scientists discovered
00:30:10that the Earth
00:30:11was constantly being
00:30:12bombarded
00:30:13by subatomic particles.
00:30:15These particles,
00:30:16which they called
00:30:17cosmic rays,
00:30:18originated,
00:30:19it was believed,
00:30:20from exploding supernovae
00:30:22far beyond
00:30:22our solar system.
00:30:25When the particles
00:30:26coming down
00:30:27meet water vapour
00:30:28rising up from the sea,
00:30:29they form water droplets
00:30:31and make clouds.
00:30:33But when the sun
00:30:34is more active
00:30:35and the solar wind
00:30:36is strong,
00:30:37fewer particles
00:30:38get through
00:30:39and fewer clouds
00:30:40are formed.
00:30:44Just how powerful
00:30:46this effect was
00:30:47became clear
00:30:48only recently
00:30:48when an astrophysicist,
00:30:50Professor Neer Shaviv,
00:30:51decided to compare
00:30:52his own record
00:30:53of cloud-forming
00:30:54cosmic rays
00:30:55with the temperature record
00:30:57created by a geologist,
00:30:58Professor Jan Weitzer,
00:31:00going back 600 million years.
00:31:03What they found
00:31:04was that when cosmic rays
00:31:06went up,
00:31:06the temperature went down.
00:31:08When cosmic rays
00:31:09went down,
00:31:10the temperature went up.
00:31:12Clouds
00:31:12and the Earth's climate
00:31:14were very closely linked
00:31:15to see how close
00:31:17you just flip the lines.
00:31:19We just compared the graphs,
00:31:21just put them
00:31:21one upon the other
00:31:22and it was just amazing.
00:31:24Jan Weitzer looked at me
00:31:25and said,
00:31:26you know,
00:31:27we have very explosive data here.
00:31:29I've never seen such
00:31:31vastly different records
00:31:33coming together
00:31:34so beautifully
00:31:35to show really
00:31:36what was happening
00:31:36over that long period of time.
00:31:38The climate
00:31:40was controlled
00:31:41by the clouds.
00:31:42The clouds
00:31:43were controlled
00:31:44by cosmic rays
00:31:45and the cosmic rays
00:31:47were controlled
00:31:48by the sun.
00:31:49It all came down
00:31:51to the sun.
00:31:55If you had
00:31:57X-ray eyes,
00:31:59what appears
00:32:00as a nice,
00:32:01friendly yellow ball
00:32:03would appear
00:32:04like a raging tiger.
00:32:12The sun is an incredibly
00:32:14violent beast
00:32:17and it's throwing out
00:32:19great explosions
00:32:21and puffs of gas
00:32:24and endless solar wind
00:32:27that's forever rushing
00:32:29past the Earth.
00:32:32We're, in a certain sense,
00:32:34inside the atmosphere
00:32:35of the sun.
00:32:38The intensity
00:32:39of its magnetic field
00:32:40more than doubled
00:32:42during the 20th century.
00:32:46In 2005,
00:32:48astrophysicists
00:32:49from Harvard University
00:32:50published the following graph
00:32:52in the official journal
00:32:53of the American
00:32:53Geophysical Union.
00:32:55The blue line
00:32:56represents temperature change
00:32:57in the Arctic
00:32:58over the past 100 years.
00:33:00And here
00:33:01is the rise in carbon dioxide
00:33:03over the same period.
00:33:06The two are not
00:33:07obviously connected.
00:33:09But now look again
00:33:10at the temperature record
00:33:11and at this red line
00:33:13which depicts variations
00:33:15in solar activity
00:33:16over the past century
00:33:17as recorded independently
00:33:19by scientists
00:33:20from NASA
00:33:21and America's
00:33:22National Oceanic
00:33:23and Atmospheric Administration.
00:33:25Solar activity
00:33:26over the last 100 years,
00:33:28over the last
00:33:28several hundred years,
00:33:29correlates very nicely
00:33:31on a decadal basis
00:33:32with C.I.'s
00:33:34Antarctic temperatures.
00:33:36To the Harvard astrophysicists
00:33:38and many other scientists,
00:33:40the conclusion
00:33:40is inescapable.
00:33:42The sun is driving
00:33:44climate change.
00:33:45CO2 is irrelevant.
00:33:48But why,
00:33:49if this is so,
00:33:50are we bombarded
00:33:51day after day
00:33:52with news items
00:33:53about man-made
00:33:54global warming?
00:33:55Why do so many people
00:33:57in the media
00:33:57and elsewhere
00:33:58regard it
00:33:59as an undisputed fact?
00:34:02To understand
00:34:03the power
00:34:04of global warming theory,
00:34:06we must tell the story
00:34:07of how it came about.
00:34:15The weather satellite
00:34:16depicts a planet
00:34:17that grieves
00:34:18for its lost harvests
00:34:19in coming to the parched farm...
00:34:21Doom-laden predictions
00:34:22about climate change
00:34:23are not new.
00:34:24In 1974,
00:34:26the BBC warned us
00:34:27of impending disasters
00:34:28which might seem
00:34:29strangely familiar.
00:34:30Again and again,
00:34:31the newsreels
00:34:32have been showing us
00:34:33disasters of the weather.
00:34:34The American Midwest
00:34:36suffered its worst drought
00:34:37since the 1930s
00:34:38and tornadoes
00:34:39were on the rampage.
00:34:41And what was going
00:34:42to be the cause
00:34:43of these disasters?
00:34:45The man behind the series
00:34:46was former
00:34:47New Scientist editor
00:34:48Nigel Calder.
00:34:49In the weather machine,
00:34:51we reported
00:34:52the mainstream opinion
00:34:54of the time
00:34:55which was global cooling
00:34:56and the threat
00:34:58of a new ice age.
00:34:59Nature's ice dwarfs us.
00:35:02After four decades
00:35:03of falling temperatures,
00:35:05experts warned
00:35:06that a cooler world
00:35:07would have cataclysmic
00:35:08catastrophic consequences.
00:35:09There's the ever-present threat
00:35:11of a big freeze.
00:35:13Will a new ice age
00:35:14claim our lands
00:35:15and bury our northern cities?
00:35:17But amid the doom
00:35:19and gloom,
00:35:20there was one voice
00:35:21of hope.
00:35:21A Swedish scientist
00:35:23called Bert Bolin
00:35:24tentatively suggested
00:35:25that man-made carbon dioxide
00:35:27might help
00:35:28to warm the world,
00:35:30although he wasn't sure.
00:35:31And there is a lot of oil
00:35:33and there are vast amounts
00:35:34of coal there.
00:35:35We seem to be burning it
00:35:36with a never-increasing rate.
00:35:38And if we go on doing this,
00:35:40in about 50 years' time,
00:35:42the climate may be
00:35:43a few degrees warmer
00:35:44than today.
00:35:45We just don't know.
00:35:46We were also the first
00:35:48to put Bert Bolin
00:35:51of Sweden
00:35:52on international television
00:35:54talking about the dangers
00:35:55of carbon dioxide.
00:35:57And I remember
00:35:58being bitterly criticised
00:36:01by top experts
00:36:02for indulging him
00:36:04in his fantasy.
00:36:06At the height
00:36:07of the cooling scare
00:36:08in the 70s,
00:36:09Bert Bolin's eccentric theory
00:36:10of man-made global warming
00:36:12seemed absurd.
00:36:13Two things happened
00:36:14to change that.
00:36:16First,
00:36:17temperatures started to rise.
00:36:19And second,
00:36:20the miners went on strike.
00:36:28To Margaret Thatcher,
00:36:30energy was a political problem.
00:36:32In the early 70s,
00:36:33the oil crisis
00:36:34had plunged the world
00:36:35into recession
00:36:36and the miners
00:36:37had brought down
00:36:37Ted Heath's
00:36:38conservative government.
00:36:40Mrs Thatcher was determined
00:36:42the same would not
00:36:43happen to her.
00:36:44She set out
00:36:45to break their power.
00:36:47What we have seen
00:36:48in this country
00:36:49is the emergence
00:36:51of an organised
00:36:53revolutionary minority
00:36:54who are prepared
00:36:56to exploit
00:36:57industrial disputes
00:36:58but whose real aim
00:37:01is the breakdown
00:37:02of law and order
00:37:03and the destruction
00:37:04of democratic
00:37:05parliamentary government.
00:37:07The politicisation
00:37:08of the subject
00:37:09started
00:37:11with Margaret Thatcher.
00:37:13She was very concerned
00:37:15always,
00:37:15I remember when I was
00:37:16Secretary of State
00:37:17for Energy,
00:37:18to promote
00:37:19nuclear power.
00:37:21Long before the issue
00:37:22of climate change
00:37:23came up
00:37:24because she was concerned
00:37:26about energy security
00:37:28and she didn't trust
00:37:29the Middle East
00:37:30and she didn't trust
00:37:31the National Union
00:37:31of Mine Workers.
00:37:32So she didn't trust oil
00:37:34and she didn't trust coal
00:37:35so therefore she felt
00:37:37we really had to push
00:37:38ahead with nuclear power.
00:37:40And then when the
00:37:42climate change,
00:37:43global warming thing
00:37:44came up,
00:37:45she felt,
00:37:45well this is great,
00:37:46this is another argument
00:37:47because it doesn't have
00:37:48any carbon dioxide emissions,
00:37:49this is another argument
00:37:50why you should go
00:37:51for nuclear.
00:37:52And that is what she was
00:37:53really largely saying.
00:37:54It's been misrepresented
00:37:56since then.
00:37:56And so she said
00:37:57to the scientists,
00:37:58she went to the Royal Society
00:38:00and she said
00:38:01there's money on the table
00:38:04for you to prove this stuff.
00:38:07So of course
00:38:08they went away
00:38:09and did that.
00:38:10Inevitably,
00:38:11the moment politicians
00:38:12put their weight
00:38:13behind something
00:38:14and attached their name
00:38:15to it in some ways,
00:38:16of course,
00:38:17money will flow.
00:38:18That's the way it goes.
00:38:20And inevitably,
00:38:21research,
00:38:22development,
00:38:23institutions
00:38:24started to bubble up,
00:38:26if you can put it that way,
00:38:26which were going
00:38:27to be researching climate,
00:38:29but with a particular emphasis
00:38:31on the relationship
00:38:31between carbon dioxide
00:38:33and temperature.
00:38:36At the request
00:38:36of Mrs Thatcher,
00:38:38the UK Met Office
00:38:39set up a climate modelling unit
00:38:41which provided the basis
00:38:42for a new international committee
00:38:44called the Intergovernmental Panel
00:38:46on Climate Change,
00:38:47or IPCC.
00:38:49They came out
00:38:51with the first big report
00:38:53which predicted
00:38:54climatic disaster
00:38:56as a result of global warming.
00:38:58I remember going
00:39:00to the scientific press conference
00:39:02and being amazed
00:39:05by two things.
00:39:06First,
00:39:06the simplicity
00:39:07and eloquence
00:39:09of the message
00:39:10and the vigour
00:39:11with which it was delivered.
00:39:13And secondly,
00:39:14the total disregard
00:39:16of all climate science
00:39:19up till that time,
00:39:21including, incidentally,
00:39:23the role of the sun,
00:39:24which had been
00:39:26the subject
00:39:27of a major meeting
00:39:29at the Royal Society
00:39:30just a few months earlier.
00:39:33But the new emphasis
00:39:35on man-made carbon dioxide
00:39:36as a possible environmental problem
00:39:38didn't just appeal
00:39:40to Mrs Thatcher.
00:39:42It was certainly something
00:39:44very favourable
00:39:46to the environmental idea,
00:39:49what I call
00:39:49the medieval environmentalism
00:39:52of let's get back
00:39:53to the way things were
00:39:55in medieval times
00:39:56and get rid of
00:39:57all these dreadful cars
00:39:58and machines.
00:39:59They loved it
00:40:01because carbon dioxide
00:40:03was for them
00:40:04an emblem
00:40:05of industrialisation.
00:40:07Well, carbon dioxide
00:40:08clearly is an industrial gas
00:40:10and tried
00:40:11and sort of tied in
00:40:13with economic growth,
00:40:17with transportation in cars,
00:40:20with what we call
00:40:21civilisation.
00:40:23And there are forces
00:40:25in the environmental movement
00:40:26that are simply
00:40:27against economic growth.
00:40:29They think that's bad.
00:40:31It could be used
00:40:33to legitimise
00:40:34a whole suite of myths
00:40:36that already existed.
00:40:38Anti-car,
00:40:39anti-growth,
00:40:40anti-development,
00:40:41and above all,
00:40:43anti-that great Satan,
00:40:46the US.
00:40:48Patrick Moore
00:40:49is considered
00:40:50one of the foremost
00:40:50environmentalists
00:40:51of his generation.
00:40:53He is co-founder
00:40:54of Greenpeace.
00:40:55The shift to climate
00:40:57being a major focal point
00:40:59came about
00:40:59for two very distinct reasons.
00:41:01The first reason
00:41:03was because
00:41:04by the mid-80s
00:41:05a majority of people
00:41:06now agreed
00:41:07with all of the
00:41:08reasonable things
00:41:09we in the environmental movement
00:41:10were saying
00:41:10they should do.
00:41:12Now, when a majority
00:41:13of people agree with you,
00:41:14it's pretty hard
00:41:15to remain confrontational
00:41:16with them.
00:41:17And so the only way
00:41:18to remain
00:41:19anti-establishment
00:41:21was to adopt
00:41:22ever more extreme positions.
00:41:24When I left Greenpeace,
00:41:25it was in the midst
00:41:26of them adopting
00:41:27a campaign
00:41:28to ban chlorine
00:41:29worldwide.
00:41:30like I said,
00:41:31you guys,
00:41:32this is one of the elements
00:41:33in the periodic table,
00:41:34you know.
00:41:35I mean,
00:41:35I'm not sure
00:41:36if that's in our jurisdiction
00:41:37to be banning
00:41:38a whole element.
00:41:40The other reason
00:41:41that environmental
00:41:42extremism emerged
00:41:44was because
00:41:44world communism failed,
00:41:46the wall came down,
00:41:47and a lot of peaceniks
00:41:48and political activists
00:41:50moved into
00:41:50the environmental movement
00:41:51bringing their
00:41:52neo-Marxism with them
00:41:54and learned to use
00:41:55green language
00:41:56in a very clever way
00:41:57to cloak agendas
00:41:58that actually have
00:41:59more to do
00:41:59with anti-capitalism
00:42:00and anti-globalization
00:42:02than they do anything
00:42:03with ecology or science.
00:42:05The left have been
00:42:06slightly disoriented
00:42:09by the manifest failure
00:42:12of socialism
00:42:13and indeed
00:42:14even more so
00:42:14of communism
00:42:15as it was
00:42:16tried out.
00:42:18And therefore,
00:42:18they still remain
00:42:19as anti-capitalist
00:42:21as they were,
00:42:21but they have to find
00:42:22a new guise
00:42:23for their anti-capitalism.
00:42:25And it was
00:42:25a kind of
00:42:27amazing alliance
00:42:29from
00:42:31Margaret Thatcher
00:42:32on the right
00:42:34through to
00:42:35very left-wing
00:42:37anti-capitalist
00:42:39environmentalists
00:42:40that created
00:42:42this kind of
00:42:43momentum
00:42:45behind a loony idea.
00:42:48By the early 1990s,
00:42:50man-made global warming
00:42:51was no longer
00:42:52a slightly eccentric
00:42:53theory about climate.
00:42:54It was a full-blown
00:42:55political campaign.
00:42:57It was attracting
00:42:58media attention
00:42:59and as a result,
00:43:00more government funding.
00:43:02Prior to
00:43:04Bush the Elder,
00:43:06I think the level
00:43:07of funding
00:43:08for climate
00:43:09and climate-related
00:43:10sciences
00:43:10was somewhere
00:43:12around the order
00:43:13of $170 million
00:43:14a year,
00:43:15which was reasonable
00:43:17for the size
00:43:17of the field.
00:43:18It jumped
00:43:19to $2 billion
00:43:20a year,
00:43:23more than a factor
00:43:24of 10.
00:43:26And, yeah,
00:43:27that changed a lot.
00:43:29I mean...
00:43:30That's a lot of jobs.
00:43:31A lot of jobs.
00:43:33It brought a lot
00:43:33of new people
00:43:34into it
00:43:35who otherwise
00:43:35were not interested.
00:43:37So you developed
00:43:38whole cadres
00:43:39of people
00:43:40whose only interest
00:43:41in the field
00:43:43was that there
00:43:44was global warming.
00:43:45If I wanted to do research
00:43:48on, shall we say,
00:43:49the squirrels
00:43:50of Sussex,
00:43:52what I would do,
00:43:54and this is any time
00:43:56from 1990 onwards,
00:43:58I would write
00:43:59my grant application
00:44:01saying,
00:44:02I want to investigate
00:44:03the nut-gathering behavior
00:44:06of squirrels
00:44:07with special reference
00:44:09to the effects
00:44:10of global warming.
00:44:12and that way
00:44:13I get my money.
00:44:14If I forget
00:44:15to mention global warming,
00:44:16I might not get the money.
00:44:18There's really no question
00:44:19in my mind
00:44:20that the large amounts
00:44:22of money
00:44:22that have been fed
00:44:23into this particular,
00:44:24rather small,
00:44:25area of science
00:44:26have distorted
00:44:27the overall scientific effort.
00:44:29We're all competing
00:44:30for funds
00:44:33and if your field
00:44:35is the focus
00:44:37of concern,
00:44:39you have that much
00:44:40less work
00:44:41rationalizing
00:44:42why your field
00:44:42should be funded.
00:44:52By the 1990s,
00:44:53tens of billions
00:44:54of dollars
00:44:55of government funding
00:44:56in the US,
00:44:57UK,
00:44:57and elsewhere
00:44:58were being diverted
00:44:59into research
00:45:00relating to global warming.
00:45:02A large portion
00:45:03of those funds
00:45:03went into building
00:45:04computer models
00:45:05to forecast
00:45:06what the climate
00:45:07will be in the future.
00:45:08But how accurate
00:45:10are those models?
00:45:11Dr. Roy Spencer
00:45:12was Senior Scientist
00:45:13for Climate Studies
00:45:14at NASA's
00:45:15Marshall Space Flight Center.
00:45:17He has been awarded
00:45:18medals for exceptional
00:45:19scientific achievement
00:45:20from both NASA
00:45:21and the American
00:45:23Meteorological Society.
00:45:25Climate models
00:45:26are only as good
00:45:27as the assumptions
00:45:28that go into them
00:45:29and they have
00:45:29hundreds of assumptions.
00:45:30All it takes
00:45:31is one assumption
00:45:31to be wrong
00:45:32for the forecast
00:45:33to be way off.
00:45:35Climate forecasts
00:45:36are not new,
00:45:37but in the past,
00:45:38scientists were more modest
00:45:40about their ability
00:45:40to predict the weather.
00:45:42Any attempt
00:45:43at forecasting changes
00:45:44of climate
00:45:44meets skepticism
00:45:46from the men
00:45:46who model the weather
00:45:47by computer.
00:45:48In making decisions
00:45:49which affect people,
00:45:50a bad prediction
00:45:52as to what the climate
00:45:53of the future will be
00:45:54can be far worse
00:45:55than none at all.
00:45:56I'm afraid that our
00:45:58understanding
00:45:58of the complex
00:45:59weather machine
00:45:59is not yet good enough
00:46:01to make a reliable
00:46:02statement of the future.
00:46:08All models assume
00:46:09that man-made CO2
00:46:11is the main cause
00:46:12of climate change
00:46:13rather than the sun
00:46:14or the clouds.
00:46:16The analogy I use
00:46:17is like my car
00:46:18is not running
00:46:19very well,
00:46:20so I'm going to
00:46:20ignore the engine,
00:46:22which is the sun,
00:46:23and I'm going to
00:46:23ignore the transmission,
00:46:24which is the water vapor,
00:46:26and I'm going to look
00:46:27at one nut
00:46:27on the right rear wheel,
00:46:28which is the human-produced
00:46:29CO2.
00:46:31It's that,
00:46:32the science is that bad.
00:46:35If you haven't understood
00:46:37the climate system,
00:46:38if you haven't understood
00:46:39all the components,
00:46:41the cosmic rays,
00:46:43the solar,
00:46:44the CO2,
00:46:46the water vapor,
00:46:47the clouds,
00:46:47and put it all together,
00:46:49if you haven't got all that,
00:46:51then your model
00:46:52isn't worth anything.
00:46:54The range of climate forecasts
00:46:56varies greatly.
00:46:58These variations are produced
00:47:00by subtly altering
00:47:01the assumptions
00:47:02upon which the models
00:47:03are based.
00:47:04The models are so complicated,
00:47:06you can often adjust them
00:47:07in such a way
00:47:08that they do something
00:47:09very exciting.
00:47:12I've worked with modelers,
00:47:13I've done modeling,
00:47:14and with a mathematical model
00:47:16and you tweak parameters,
00:47:18you can model anything.
00:47:19You can make it warmer,
00:47:20you can make it get colder
00:47:21by changing things.
00:47:25Since all the models
00:47:26assume that man-made CO2
00:47:28causes warming,
00:47:29one obvious way
00:47:30to produce a more
00:47:31impressive forecast
00:47:32is to increase the amount
00:47:34of imagined man-made CO2
00:47:36going into the atmosphere.
00:47:37We put an increase
00:47:39in carbon dioxide in them
00:47:40that is 1% per year.
00:47:42It's been 0.49% per year
00:47:44for the last 10 years,
00:47:460.42% for the 10 years
00:47:47before that,
00:47:48and 0.43% for the 10 years
00:47:50before that.
00:47:50So the models have
00:47:52twice as much
00:47:53greenhouse warming radiation
00:47:55going in them
00:47:56as is known to be happening.
00:47:58It shouldn't shock you
00:48:00that they predict
00:48:01more warming
00:48:01than is occurring.
00:48:06Models predict
00:48:07what the temperature
00:48:08might be
00:48:09in 50 or 100 years' time.
00:48:11It is one of their
00:48:12peculiar features
00:48:13that long-range
00:48:14climate forecasts
00:48:15are only proved wrong
00:48:17long after people
00:48:18have forgotten about them.
00:48:19As a result,
00:48:20there is a danger,
00:48:21according to Professor
00:48:22Carl Wunsch,
00:48:23that modelers
00:48:24will be less concerned
00:48:25in producing a forecast
00:48:26that is accurate
00:48:27than one that is interesting.
00:48:30Even within
00:48:31the scientific community,
00:48:33you see,
00:48:33it's a problem.
00:48:34If I run a complicated model
00:48:36and I do something to it,
00:48:38like melt a lot of ice
00:48:40into the ocean
00:48:41and nothing happens,
00:48:44it's not likely
00:48:45to get printed.
00:48:46But if I run the same model
00:48:48and I adjust it
00:48:49in such a way
00:48:50that something dramatic
00:48:51happens to the ocean,
00:48:52circulation,
00:48:53like the heat transport
00:48:55turns off,
00:48:56it will be published.
00:48:58People say
00:48:58this is very exciting.
00:49:00It will even get picked up
00:49:01by the media.
00:49:03So there is a bias,
00:49:04there's a very powerful bias
00:49:05within the media
00:49:06and within the science
00:49:07community itself
00:49:09toward results
00:49:10which are dramatizable.
00:49:15The Earth freezes over.
00:49:16That's a much more
00:49:17interesting story
00:49:19than saying,
00:49:19well, you know,
00:49:20it fluctuates around
00:49:22sometimes the mass flux
00:49:24goes up by 10%,
00:49:25sometimes it goes down
00:49:26by 20%,
00:49:27but eventually
00:49:28it comes back.
00:49:29Well, you know,
00:49:30which would you
00:49:31do a story of?
00:49:32I mean,
00:49:33that's what it's about.
00:49:35To the untrained eye,
00:49:37computer models
00:49:38look impressive
00:49:39and they give
00:49:40and they give
00:49:40often wild speculation
00:49:41about the climate,
00:49:42the appearance
00:49:43of rigorous science.
00:49:45They also provide
00:49:46an endless source
00:49:47of spectacular stories
00:49:49for the media.
00:49:50The thing that has amazed me
00:49:51as a lifelong journalist
00:49:54is how the most
00:49:56elementary principles
00:49:57of journalism
00:49:58seem to have been
00:49:59abandoned
00:49:59on this subject.
00:50:01In fact,
00:50:02the theory of man-made
00:50:03global warming
00:50:04has spawned
00:50:04an entirely new branch
00:50:06of journalism.
00:50:07You've got a whole new
00:50:09generation of reporters,
00:50:11environmental journalists.
00:50:13Now,
00:50:14if you're an environmental
00:50:14journalist
00:50:15and if
00:50:17the global warming story
00:50:19goes in the trash can,
00:50:21so does your job.
00:50:23It really is that crude.
00:50:26And
00:50:26the reporting
00:50:28has to get more
00:50:29and more hysterical
00:50:30because there are
00:50:31still, fortunately,
00:50:33a few hardened
00:50:35news editors around
00:50:36who will say,
00:50:37you know,
00:50:38this is what you were saying
00:50:38five years ago.
00:50:40Ah, but now
00:50:41it's much, much worse.
00:50:42You know,
00:50:43there's going to be
00:50:43ten feet of sea level rise
00:50:45by next Tuesday
00:50:46or something.
00:50:47They have to keep on
00:50:49getting shriller
00:50:50and shriller
00:50:51and shriller.
00:50:53It is now common
00:50:55in the media
00:50:55to lay the blame
00:50:56for every storm
00:50:57or hurricane
00:50:57on global warming.
00:50:59But is there any
00:51:00scientific basis
00:51:01for this?
00:51:02This is purely
00:51:04propaganda.
00:51:06Every textbook
00:51:06in meteorology
00:51:07is telling you
00:51:09the main source
00:51:11of weather disturbances
00:51:13is the temperature
00:51:14difference
00:51:15between the tropics
00:51:16and the pole.
00:51:17And we're told
00:51:18in a warmer world
00:51:20this difference
00:51:21will get less.
00:51:22Now,
00:51:23that would tell you
00:51:24you'll have less
00:51:25storminess,
00:51:26you'll have less
00:51:27variability.
00:51:28but for some reason
00:51:29that isn't considered
00:51:30catastrophic.
00:51:31So you're told
00:51:32the opposite.
00:51:34News reports
00:51:35frequently argue
00:51:36that even a mild
00:51:37increase in global
00:51:38temperature
00:51:38could lead to
00:51:39a catastrophic
00:51:40melting
00:51:40of the polar
00:51:41ice caps.
00:51:42But what does
00:51:43Earth's climate
00:51:44history tell us?
00:51:46We happen to have
00:51:47temperature records
00:51:48of Greenland
00:51:49that go back
00:51:49thousands of years.
00:51:51Greenland has been
00:51:52much warmer.
00:51:54Just a thousand years
00:51:55ago, Greenland
00:51:56was warmer
00:51:56than it is today.
00:51:58Yet it didn't have
00:51:59a dramatic
00:52:00melting event.
00:52:01Even if we talk
00:52:02about something
00:52:03like permafrost,
00:52:04a great deal
00:52:05of the permafrost,
00:52:06that icy layer
00:52:07under the forests
00:52:09of Russia,
00:52:09for example,
00:52:10seven or eight
00:52:11thousand years ago
00:52:12melted far more
00:52:13than we're having
00:52:13any evidence
00:52:14about it melting
00:52:15now.
00:52:16So in other words,
00:52:17this is a historical
00:52:18pattern again,
00:52:18but the world
00:52:19didn't come to
00:52:19a crunching halt
00:52:20because of it.
00:52:23Professor Siyunishi
00:52:24Akasofu is head
00:52:26of the International
00:52:26Arctic Research
00:52:27Center in Alaska.
00:52:29The IARC is the
00:52:31world's leading
00:52:32Arctic research
00:52:33institute.
00:52:34Professor Akasofu
00:52:35insists that over
00:52:37time, the ice caps
00:52:38are always naturally
00:52:39expanding and
00:52:40contracting.
00:52:42There are reports
00:52:43from time to time,
00:52:44a big chunk of
00:52:45ice break away
00:52:47from the Antarctic
00:52:49continent.
00:52:51Those must have
00:52:53been happening
00:52:53all the time,
00:52:56but because now
00:52:57we have a satellite
00:52:58that can detect
00:53:00those, that's why
00:53:02they become news.
00:53:04This data from
00:53:05NASA's meteorological
00:53:06satellites shows
00:53:07the huge natural
00:53:09expansion and
00:53:10contraction of the
00:53:11polar sea ice
00:53:11taking place in
00:53:12the 1990s.
00:53:14Actually, all the
00:53:15TV programs that
00:53:17relate to the
00:53:17global warming
00:53:18show a big chunk
00:53:20of ice falling
00:53:21from the edge
00:53:22of the glaciers,
00:53:23but people forget
00:53:25that ice is
00:53:26always moving.
00:53:29News reports
00:53:30frequently show
00:53:31images of ice
00:53:31breaking from
00:53:32the edge of the
00:53:33Arctic.
00:53:33What they don't
00:53:34say is that this
00:53:36is as ordinary
00:53:36an event in the
00:53:37Arctic as falling
00:53:38leaves on an
00:53:39English autumn
00:53:40day.
00:53:41They ask me,
00:53:42did you see
00:53:43ice falling from
00:53:45the edge of the
00:53:45glaciers?
00:53:46yes, that's the
00:53:48spring break-up.
00:53:50That's happened
00:53:51every year.
00:53:52Press come to
00:53:52us all the time,
00:53:54you know, I want
00:53:55to see something
00:53:55that the greenhouse
00:53:58disaster, I say,
00:54:00there is none.
00:54:03Alarming television
00:54:04programs raise the
00:54:05fearful prospect of
00:54:06vast tidal waves
00:54:08flooding Britain.
00:54:08But what causes the
00:54:10sea level to change
00:54:11and how fast does
00:54:12it happen?
00:54:13Sea level changes
00:54:14over the world in
00:54:15general are governed
00:54:16fundamentally by two
00:54:18factors.
00:54:19What we would call
00:54:20local factors, the
00:54:21relationship of the
00:54:22sea to the land,
00:54:23which often, by the
00:54:23way, is to do with
00:54:24the land rising or
00:54:25falling than anything
00:54:26to do with the sea.
00:54:27But if you're talking
00:54:28about what we call
00:54:30eustatic changes of
00:54:31sea, worldwide
00:54:32changes of sea,
00:54:33that's through the
00:54:34thermal expansion of
00:54:36the ocean.
00:54:37It's nothing to do
00:54:37with melting ice.
00:54:38And that's an
00:54:39enormously slow and
00:54:41long process.
00:54:44People say, oh, I
00:54:46see the ocean doing
00:54:47this last year.
00:54:48That means that
00:54:50something changed in
00:54:51the atmosphere last
00:54:52year.
00:54:53And this is not
00:54:54necessarily true at
00:54:55all.
00:54:55In fact, it's actually
00:54:56quite unlikely because
00:54:57it can take hundreds
00:54:59to thousands of years
00:55:00for the deep ocean to
00:55:02respond to forces and
00:55:05changes that are
00:55:05taking place at the
00:55:07surface.
00:55:08It is also suggested
00:55:10that even a mild rise
00:55:11in temperature will
00:55:13lead to the spread
00:55:13northward of deadly
00:55:15insect-borne tropical
00:55:16diseases like malaria.
00:55:18But is this true?
00:55:21Professor Paul Reiter of
00:55:23the Pasteur Institute in
00:55:24Paris is recognized as
00:55:25one of the world's
00:55:26leading experts on
00:55:27malaria and other
00:55:28insect-borne diseases.
00:55:30He is a member of the
00:55:31World Health Organization
00:55:32Expert Advisory Committee,
00:55:34was chairman of the
00:55:35American Committee of
00:55:36Medical Entomology of the
00:55:37American Society for
00:55:38Tropical Medicine and
00:55:40lead author on the
00:55:41health section of the
00:55:42U.S. National Assessment
00:55:43of the Potential
00:55:44Consequences of Climate
00:55:45Variability.
00:55:48As Professor Reiter is
00:55:49eager to point out,
00:55:51mosquitoes thrive in
00:55:52in very cold temperatures.
00:55:56Mosquitoes are not
00:55:57specifically tropical.
00:55:58Most people will realize
00:55:59that in temperate regions
00:56:00there are mosquitoes.
00:56:02In fact, mosquitoes are
00:56:04extremely abundant in the
00:56:06Arctic.
00:56:07The most devastating
00:56:09epidemic of malaria was in
00:56:10the Soviet Union in the
00:56:111920s.
00:56:13There were something like
00:56:1413 million cases a year
00:56:16and something like 600,000
00:56:18deaths, a tremendous
00:56:20catastrophe that reached
00:56:22up to the Arctic Circle.
00:56:23Archangel had 30,000
00:56:25cases and about 10,000
00:56:27deaths.
00:56:28So it's not a tropical
00:56:29disease.
00:56:30Yet these people in the
00:56:32global warming fraternity
00:56:34invent the idea that
00:56:36malaria will move
00:56:37northwards.
00:56:38Climate scare stories
00:56:40cannot be blamed solely on
00:56:41sloppy or biased journalism.
00:56:43According to Professor Reiter,
00:56:45hysterical alarms have been
00:56:46encouraged by the reports of
00:56:48the United Nations
00:56:49Intergovernmental Panel on
00:56:50Climate Change, or IPCC.
00:56:53On the spread of malaria,
00:56:54the IPCC warns us that
00:56:56mosquito species that
00:56:58transmit malaria do not
00:56:59usually survive where the
00:57:00mean winter temperature drops
00:57:02below 16 to 18 degrees
00:57:03Celsius.
00:57:04According to Professor
00:57:06Reiter, this is clearly
00:57:07untrue.
00:57:08I was horrified to read the
00:57:11second and the third
00:57:12assessment reports because
00:57:13there was so much
00:57:14misinformation without any
00:57:17kind of recourse or virtually
00:57:19without mention of the
00:57:22scientific literature, the
00:57:23truly scientific literature,
00:57:25the literature by specialists
00:57:26in those fields.
00:57:28In a letter to the Wall Street
00:57:29Journal, Professor Frederick
00:57:31Seitz, former president of
00:57:32America's National Academy of
00:57:34Sciences, revealed that IPCC
00:57:36officials had censored the
00:57:38comments of scientists.
00:57:39He said that...
00:57:40This report is not the version
00:57:42that was approved by the
00:57:43contributing scientists.
00:57:45At least 15 key sections of
00:57:47the science chapter had been
00:57:48deleted.
00:57:49These included statements like...
00:57:51None of the studies cited has
00:57:53shown clear evidence that we can
00:57:55attribute climate changes to
00:57:56increases in greenhouse gases.
00:57:58No study to date has positively
00:58:01attributed all or part of the
00:58:02observed climate changes to
00:58:04man-made causes.
00:58:06Professor Seitz concluded...
00:58:08I have never witnessed a more
00:58:10disturbing corruption of the
00:58:11peer-review process than the
00:58:13events that led to this IPCC report.
00:58:17In its reply, the IPCC did not deny
00:58:20making these deletions, but it said
00:58:22there was no dishonesty or bias in
00:58:24the report and that uncertainties
00:58:26about the cause of global warming
00:58:27had been included.
00:58:29The changes had been made, it said,
00:58:31in response to comments from
00:58:33governments, individual scientists
00:58:34and non-governmental organisations.
00:58:37When I resigned from the IPCC, I
00:58:40thought that was the end of it.
00:58:41But when I saw the final draft, my
00:58:44name was still there, so I asked for
00:58:46it to be removed.
00:58:47Well, they told me that I had
00:58:49contributed so it would remain
00:58:51there.
00:58:51So I said, no, I haven't
00:58:53contributed because they haven't
00:58:54listened to anything I've said.
00:58:56So in the end, it was quite a battle.
00:58:58But finally, I threatened legal
00:58:59action against them and they
00:59:01removed my name.
00:59:02And I think this happens a great
00:59:03deal.
00:59:04Those people who are specialists but
00:59:07don't agree with the polemic and
00:59:09resign, and there have been a number
00:59:11that I know of, they are simply put
00:59:13on the author list and become part
00:59:15of this 2,500 of the world's top
00:59:17scientists.
00:59:19Research relating to man-made global
00:59:21warming is now one of the best-funded
00:59:23areas of science.
00:59:24The U.S. government alone spends more
00:59:26than $4 billion a year.
00:59:28According to NASA climatologist Roy
00:59:30Spencer, scientists who speak out
00:59:32against man-made global warming have a
00:59:34lot to lose.
00:59:35It's generally harder to get research
00:59:38proposals funded because of the stands
00:59:41that we've taken publicly.
00:59:42And you'll find very few of us that are
00:59:43willing to take a public stand because it
00:59:46does cut into their research funding.
00:59:48It is a common prejudice that scientists
00:59:51who do not agree with the theory of
00:59:52man-made global warming must be being
00:59:54paid by private industry to tell lies.
00:59:57I get it all the time.
00:59:58You must be in the pay of the
01:00:00multinationals.
01:00:01Sadly, like most of the scientists you'll
01:00:04talk to, I haven't seen a penny from the
01:00:05multinationals.
01:00:06I'm always accused of being paid by the
01:00:08oil and gas companies.
01:00:09I've never received a nickel from the
01:00:11oil and gas companies.
01:00:12I joke about it.
01:00:13I wish they would pay me and then I could
01:00:14afford their product.
01:00:15Whenever anybody says that I'm in the
01:00:18pay of an oil company, I say my bank
01:00:20manager would wish.
01:00:24There is almost no private sector
01:00:26investment in climatology.
01:00:28And yet, to be involved in any research
01:00:30project which involves an industry grant,
01:00:32no matter how small, can spell ruin to a
01:00:34scientist's reputation.
01:00:36Modern technology fueled by greenhouse
01:00:38gases.
01:00:40Patrick Michaels is professor of
01:00:42environmental sciences at the University
01:00:44of Virginia.
01:00:45He was chair of the Committee on Applied
01:00:47Climatology at the American Meteorological
01:00:49Society, president of the American
01:00:51Association of State Climatologists, the
01:00:53author of three books on meteorology, and
01:00:56an author and reviewer on the UN's
01:00:58Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
01:00:59Change.
01:01:01But when he conducted research which was
01:01:03part-funded by the coal industry, he found
01:01:05himself among those under attack from
01:01:08climate campaigners.
01:01:12British-based corporations are some of the
01:01:15worst climate criminals on the planet.
01:01:19Shell is based in the UK, right here in
01:01:23London.
01:01:23We have the right and the duty to take it
01:01:25back into public ownership, dismantle it,
01:01:28break it up, and send its managers to
01:01:30rehabilitation training.
01:01:31But reasoned debate is not the only casualty in
01:01:35the global warming alarm.
01:01:36As international public policy bears down on
01:01:39industrial emissions of carbon dioxide, the
01:01:41developing world is coming under intense
01:01:43pressure not to develop.
01:01:50I'm no expert on climate change, I'm no scientist, and what I'm
01:01:54going to say next is a great big turn-off.
01:01:56It's just that.
01:01:57Turning off anything you don't need, you're not
01:02:02using it.
01:02:03It's easier than you think to make a difference.
01:02:11Delegates from around the world are flying into Nairobi
01:02:14for a conference sponsored by the UN to talk about
01:02:18global warming.
01:02:20Civil servants, professional NGO campaigners,
01:02:24carbon offset fund managers, environmental journalists,
01:02:27and others will discuss every aspect of man-made climate change,
01:02:31from how to promote solar panels in Africa to the
01:02:34relationship between global warming and sexism.
01:02:37The conference lasts ten days.
01:02:40The number of delegates exceeds 6,000.
01:02:44The billions of dollars invested in climate science means
01:02:47there is a huge constituency of people dependent upon those
01:02:50dollars, and they will want to see that carry forward.
01:02:53It happens in any bureaucracy.
01:02:55Where I live, we have a local council global warming officer.
01:03:02There's a huge tale out there of people who have, in one way or
01:03:11another, been recruited to join this particular bandwagon.
01:03:16Anybody who then stands up and says, hey, wait a minute, let's look at this
01:03:20coolly and rationally and carefully and see actually how much merit,
01:03:25how much this stands up, they will be ostracized.
01:03:30Scientists, accustomed to the relative civility and obscurity of academic life,
01:03:35suddenly find themselves publicly attacked if they dare to challenge
01:03:39the theory of man-made global warming, vilified by campaign groups
01:03:43and even within their own universities.
01:03:46It's the old English saying, if you stand up in the coconut shy,
01:03:49they're going to throw at you.
01:03:50So I understand that there's going to be some of that, but it gets pretty
01:03:54difficult and pretty nasty and very personal.
01:03:57And there have been, you know, death threats and all sorts of things,
01:04:01and so I'm not doing it for my health.
01:04:04These days, if you are skeptical about the litany around climate change,
01:04:09you're suddenly like as if you're a Holocaust denier.
01:04:14The environmental movement, really, it is a political activist movement,
01:04:18and they have become hugely influential at a global level.
01:04:26And every politician is aware of that today.
01:04:29Whether you're on the left, in the middle, or the right,
01:04:32you have to pay homage to the environment.
01:04:35In the past month, the global warming campaign has won a great victory.
01:04:40The United States government, once a bastion of resistance, has succumbed.
01:04:45George Bush is now an ally.
01:04:48Western governments have now embraced the need for international agreements
01:04:51to restrain industrial production in the developed and developing world.
01:04:56But at what cost?
01:04:59Paul Driesen is a former environmental campaigner.
01:05:01My big concern with global warming is that the policies being pushed
01:05:08to supposedly prevent global warming
01:05:11are having a disastrous effect on the world's poorest people.
01:05:16Global warming campaigners say it does no harm to be on the safe side.
01:05:20Even if the theory of man-made climate change is wrong,
01:05:23we should impose draconian measures to cut carbon emissions just in case.
01:05:28They call this the precautionary principle.
01:05:31The precautionary principle is a very interesting beast.
01:05:35It's basically used to promote a particular agenda and ideology.
01:05:39It's always used in one direction only.
01:05:42It talks about the risks of using a particular technology, fossil fuels, for example,
01:05:48but never about the risks of not using it.
01:05:51It never talks about the benefits of having that technology.
01:05:57Ann Mugella is about to cook a meal for her children.
01:06:00She is one of the two billion people, a third of the world's population,
01:06:04who have no access to electricity.
01:06:06Instead, they must burn wood or dried animal dung in their homes.
01:06:11The indoor smoke this creates is the deadliest form of pollution in the world.
01:06:16According to the World Health Organisation, four million children under the age of five
01:06:21die each year from respiratory diseases caused by indoor smoke,
01:06:25and many millions of women die early from cancer and lung disease for the same reason.
01:06:31If you were to ask a rural person to define development,
01:06:35they'll tell you, yes, I know I've moved to the next level when I have electricity.
01:06:40Actually, not having electricity creates such a long chain of problems,
01:06:44because the first thing you miss is the light.
01:06:47So you get that they have to go to sleep earlier,
01:06:50because there's no light, there's no reason to stay awake.
01:06:54I mean, you can't talk to each other in darkness.
01:06:57No refrigeration or modern packaging means that food cannot be kept.
01:07:01A fire in the hut is too smoky and consumes too much wood to be used as heating.
01:07:06There is no hot water.
01:07:08We in the West cannot begin to imagine how hard life is without electricity.
01:07:13The life expectancy of people who live like this is terrifyingly short,
01:07:18their existence impoverished in every way.
01:07:23A few miles away, the UN is hosting its conference on global warming
01:07:27in its plush, gated headquarters.
01:07:31The gift shop is selling souvenirs of peasant tribal life,
01:07:34while delegates discuss how to promote what are described as
01:07:37sustainable forms of electrical generation.
01:07:42Africa has coal, and Africa has oil.
01:07:46But environmental groups are campaigning against the use of these cheap sources of energy.
01:07:52Instead, they say Africa and the rest of the developing world
01:07:56should use solar and wind power.
01:08:02A short drive out of Nairobi, we find our first solar panel.
01:08:07A Kenyan public health official has brought us to a clinic
01:08:11which serves several villages.
01:08:13The only electrical implements in the clinic are the electric lights
01:08:17and a refrigerator in which to keep vaccines, medicine and blood samples.
01:08:23Electricity is provided by two solar panels.
01:08:26So what can it do successfully?
01:08:29Lighting.
01:08:30Lighting only.
01:08:31Yes.
01:08:31What happens when you put lighting plus the refrigerator and others?
01:08:36What happens?
01:08:38It sounds an alarm.
01:08:40It sounds an alarm.
01:08:41Yeah.
01:08:42Can we maybe see that?
01:08:51The solar panels allow Dr. Samuel Mwangi to use either the lights or the refrigerator,
01:08:58but not both at the same time.
01:09:00If he does, the electricity shuts down.
01:09:04Wind and solar power are notoriously unreliable as a source of electricity
01:09:08and are at least three times more expensive than conventional forms of electrical generation.
01:09:15The question would be how many people in Europe,
01:09:18how many people in the United States are already using that kind of energy
01:09:22and how cheap is it, you see?
01:09:25If it's expensive for the Europeans, if it's expensive for the Americans,
01:09:30and we are talking about poor Africans, you know, it doesn't make sense.
01:09:34The rich countries can afford to engage in some luxurious experimentation
01:09:38with other forms of energy.
01:09:41But for us, we are still at the stage of survival.
01:09:45To former environmentalist Paul Driesen,
01:09:48the idea that the world's poorest people should be restricted to using the world's most expensive
01:09:54and inefficient forms of electrical generation
01:09:56is the most morally repugnant aspect of the global warming campaign.
01:10:02Let me make one thing perfectly clear.
01:10:05If we're telling the third world that they can only have wind and solar power,
01:10:12what we are really telling them is you cannot have electricity.
01:10:17The challenge we have when we meet Western environmentalists
01:10:22who say we must engage in use of solar panels and wind energy
01:10:27is how we can have Africa industrialized.
01:10:32Because I don't see how a solar panel is going to power a steel industry.
01:10:38How a solar panel, you know, is going to power maybe some railway train network.
01:10:45It might work maybe to power a small transistor radio.
01:10:51I think one of the most pernicious aspects of the modern environmental movement
01:10:56is this romanticization of peasant life
01:11:00and the idea that industrial societies are the destroyers of the world.
01:11:07One clear thing that emerges from the whole environmental debate
01:11:12is the point that there's somebody keen to kill the African dream
01:11:17and the African dream is to develop.
01:11:20The environmental movement has evolved into the strongest force there is
01:11:25for preventing development in the developing countries.
01:11:29We are being told, don't touch your resource.
01:11:31Don't touch your oil.
01:11:32Don't touch your coal.
01:11:34That is suicide.
01:11:36I think it's legitimate for me to call them anti-human.
01:11:39Like, okay, you don't have to think humans are better than whales
01:11:45or better than owls or whatever if you don't want to, right?
01:11:49But surely it is not a good idea to think of humans as sort of being scum,
01:11:56you know, that it's okay to have hundreds of millions of them go blind or die or whatever.
01:12:02I just can't relate to that.
01:12:04The theory of man-made global warming is now so firmly entrenched,
01:12:08the voices of opposition so effectively silenced, it seems invincible.
01:12:14Untroubled by any contrary evidence, no matter how strong,
01:12:18the global warming alarm is now beyond reason.
01:12:23There will still be people who believe that this is the end of the world,
01:12:27particularly when you have, for example, the chief scientist of the UK telling people
01:12:34that by the end of the century, the only habitable place on the earth will be the Antarctic.
01:12:41And humanity may survive thanks to some breeding couples who move to the Antarctic.
01:12:48I mean, this is hilarious.
01:12:51It would be hilarious, actually, if it weren't so sad.
01:12:55You can do that.
01:12:55You can do that.
Commentaires