The truth about global warming

100
102


. MARK: HELLO, AMERICA. I’M MARK LEVIN. THIS IS “LIFE, LIBERTY & LEVIN.” WELCOME.>>NICE TO SEE YOU.>>IT’S A GREAT HONOR TO SEE YOU, PATRICK MICHAELS. DOCTOR. EXPERT ON ALL THINGS CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT AS FAR AS I’M CONCERNED. LITTLE BIT OF YOUR BACKGROUND. DIRECTOR OF THE STUDY OF SCIENCE AT THE CATO INSTITUTE. YOU HOLD AN AB IN SM, YOU HOLD THOSE DEGREES IN BIOLOGY, SCIENCES AND PLANT ECOLOGY FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO. PRETTY GOOD SCHOOL. Ph.D. IN ECOLOGICAL CLIMATOLOGY FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN IN MADISON, 1979. PRESIDENT OF THE STATE CLIMATOLOGISTS, PROGRAM CHAIRMAN FOR THE CITY OF APPLIED CLIMATOLOGY OF THE AMERICAN METEORLOGICAL SOCIETY. SAY THAT FAST FIVE TIMES. RESEARCH PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA FOR 30 YEARS, AND GIVING EXPANSIVE BACKGROUND THAT YOU HAVE, GIVING THAT TO THE PUBLIC SO THEY THAT YOU KNOW WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT. YOU’RE A CONTRIBUTING AUTHOR AND REVIEWER OF THE UNITED NATIONS INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL PANEL OF CLIMATE CHANGE. WE’VE HEARD IT ALL. WHAT’S GOING ON OUT THERE?>>WELL, SURFACE TEMPERATURE OF THE PLANET IS WARMER THAN IT WAS 100 YEARS AGO ABOUT. 9/10th OF A DEGREE CELSIUS. MARK: 9/10th DEGREE OF CELSIUS IS THAT A LOT?>>NO. COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY HUMAN BEINGS, WE HAVEN’T PUT ENOUGH CO2 IN THE AIR, AND ONE IN THE LATER PART OF THE 20th CENTURY THAT SLOWS DOWN OR DEPENDS WHOSE DATA YOU USE ONLY TO RESUME WITH THE BIG EL NINO THAT COVERED THE NEWS THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. THAT MEANS THAT PROBABLY HALF, MAYBE HALF OF THAT NINE-TENTHS OF THE DEGREE MIGHT BE CAUSED BY GREENHOUSE GASES. WHEN THE PLANET WARMED BEGINNING 1976, THE TEMPERATURE OF THE STRATOSPHERE STARTED TO STOP, THAT’S THE PREDICTION OF GREENHOUSE THEORY THAT’S NOT INTUITIVE. THE GREAT PHILOSOPHER OF SCIENCE CARL POPPER SAID IF YOU CAN MEET A DIFFICULT PREDICTION WITH YOUR THEORY, YOU CAN CONTINUE TO ENTERTAIN YOUR THEORY. SO THE THEORY IS RIGHT, BUT THE APPLICATION OF IT IS WRONG. IT IS NOWHERE NEAR AS WARM AS IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE. THE COMPUTER MODELS ARE MAKING SYSTEMATIC, DRAMATIC ERRORS OVER THE ENTIRE TROPICS WHICH IS 40% OF THE EARTH, AND IT’S WHERE ALL OUR MOISTURE COMES FROM. ALMOST ALL OF IT. MARK: LET ME STOP YOU THERE. WHO DOES THESE COMPUTER MODELS?>>GOVERNMENTS. THERE ARE 32 FAMILIES OF COMPUTER MODELS THAT ARE USED BY THE UNITED NATIONS. EACH GOVERNMENT SPONSORED. AND ALL OF THEM ARE PREDICTING FAR, FAR TOO MUCH WARMING. THE DISPARITY BETWEEN WHAT’S BEEN PREDICTED TO HAPPEN, WHICH LOOKS LIKE SDMSHGS WHAT IS HAPPENING CONTINUES TO GROW. MARK: WE KNOW THAT FOR A FACT?>>YEAH, YOU COULD JUST LOOK AT THE WEATHER BALLOON TEMPERATURES. YOU CAN LOOK AT THE SATELLITE TEMPERATURES. YOU CAN LOOK AT SOMETHING CALLED THE REANALYSIS DATA. THEY BEHAVE IN CONCERT. THEY’RE SHOWING THE SAME THING, AND THE SAME THING IS A LOT DIFFERENT THAN THIS THING. HOWEVER, WE NEED TO CALL THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. MARK: SPECIAL COUNSEL?>>YES, BECAUSE ONE MODEL WORKS. YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS? IT’S THE RUSSIAN MODEL. MARK: LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT. SO ALL THE GOVERNMENT MODELS ARE LIKE THIS?>>YEAH. MARK: THE RUSSIAN MODEL LIKE THIS.>>YEAH. THE RUSSIAN MODEL HAS THE LEAST WARMING IN IT. MARK: THE RUSSIAN MODEL HAS THE LEAST WARMING AND PRETTY MUCH FOLLOWS REALITY. WHAT’S BEEN TESTED OVER A FEW DECADES.>>YEAH, CORRECT. IF WE WERE RATIONAL ABOUT THIS, THINK ABOUT THE DAILY WEATHER FORECAST. YOU WATCH THE WEATHER CHANNEL, THEY GO THIS MODEL SAYS THAT, THAT MODEL SAYS THAT, WE THINK THIS ONE IS WORKING THE BEST, WE’RE GOING TO RELY ON THAT. WELL, FOR CLIMATE FORECAST SHOULD BE USING THE RUSSIAN MODEL BUT WE’RE NOT. WE USE THIS BIG SPATE OF ALL THE OTHER MODELS THAT HAVE THE WARMING THAT’S NOT OCCURRING. MARK: WHY ARE THE OTHER MODELS, 31 OF THEM, WRONG. AND WHY DO THEY ALL GO THE SAME DIRECTION, UP?>>BECAUSE, THEY WHAT ARE IS CALLED PARAMETERIZED. THEY’RE ALL PARAMETERIZED, CAN I TRANSLATE PARAMETERIZED IN ENGLISH? FUDGE. THEY DON’T GET THE RIGHT ANSWER, DON’T KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER FOR CERTAIN PHENOMENA, SO WE ESSENTIALLY PUT IN CODE STEPS THAT GIVE US WHAT WE THINK IT SHOULD BE. AND SYSTEMATIC ERROR THAT WAS MADE WAS THE MODELS WERE TUNED, AS IT SAID. TUNED. TUNED TO SIMULATE THE WARMING OF THE EARLY 20th CENTURY. BEGAN IN 1910, ENDED IN 1945, ABOUT .45 DEGREES CELSIUS. MARK, THAT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY CARBON DIOXIDE. MARK: BECAUSE THERE WASN’T ENOUGH.>>WE HAD TO PUT ENOUGH IN THAT THE BACKGROUND CARBON DIOXIDE CONCENTRATION IS 280 MILLION PARTS PER MILLION. WHEN THE FIRST WARMING STARTED, 208 PARTS PER MILLION. IF IT IS THAT SENSITIVE TO 18PPM CHANGE IN CO2 WE WOULDN’T BE TALKING ABOUT THIS RIGHT NOW AND WE’D BE SWEATING BULLETS.>>SO WHAT YOU’RE SAYING IS MAN MADE CARBON DIOXIDE THE LAST CENTURY COULD NOT HAVE PRODUCED –>>EARLY 20th CENTURY. MARK: COULD NOT HAVE PRODUCED THIS HEAT. SO WHAT DID? DO WE KNOW?>>NO. AND THREE MOST IMPORTANT WORDS IN LIFE MAY NOT BE I LOVE YOU. IT MAY BE I DON’T KNOW. I DON’T THINK ANYBODY REALLY KNOWS WHAT KICKED OFF THAT WARMING. THERE’S LOTS OF THEORIES. ONE IS THAT IT WAS THE FINAL ESCAPE FROM A GOLD PERIOD, MULTICENTURY PERIOD KNOWN AS THE LITTLE ICE AGE. THAT’S THE PLAUSIBILITY, WHY DID IT HAPPEN THEN. BUT WE DON’T HAVE A GOOD EXPLANATION FOR THAT. BECAUSE WE FORCED THE COMPUTER MODELS TO SAY, HUMAN INFLUENCE, CO2 AND OTHER STUFF. WE MADE THE MODELS TOO SENSITIVE, AND SO THAT’S WHY WHEN YOU GET TO THE LATE 20th CENTURY, ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY’RE WARMING UP LIKE CRAZY AND THE REALITY IS DOWN HERE. IT WAS GUARANTEED TO HAPPEN. THIS WAS REVEALED IN SCIENCE MAGAZINE IN LATE 2016, AND THERE WAS A PAPER PUBLISHED BY A FRENCH CLIMATE MODELER CALLED THE ART AND SCIENCE OF CLIMATE MODEL TUNING. AND IN IT, HE SPEAKS OF PARAMETERIZING. WE COULD SAY FUDGING, THE MODELS TO GIVE, HIS WORDS, AN ANTICIPATED ACCEPTABLE RANGE OF RESULTS. SO IT’S THE SCIENTIST, NOT THE SCIENCE THAT’S DETERMINING HOW MUCH IT’S GOING TO WARM. LOT OF PEOPLE DON’T KNOW THIS, BUT IT HAPPENS TO BE TRUE, AND YOU KNOW, WE COULD SPECULATE AS TO WHY THAT PAPER WAS PUBLISHED RIGHT BEFORE THE 2016 ELECTION? I WOULDN’T WANT TO IMPUTE CAUSATION, BUT GEE — MARK: BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT CAUSATION.>>SURE. MARK: HAVE YOU 31 GOVERNMENTS.>>THE 31 DIFFERENT MODELS.>>31 DIFFERENT MODELS. MULTIPLE GOVERNMENTS.>>RIGHT. MARK: FUDGING THE NUMBERS?>>NOT FUDGING THEM PARAMETERIZING. MARK: YOU USED THE WORD FUDGING. DOES OUR EPA DO THAT? DOES NASA DO THAT? WHO DOES THAT FOR US?>>GOOD QUESTION, MARK, BECAUSE THE EPA WAS TOLD BY THE SUPREME COURT IN 2007 THAT IF IT FOUND THE CARBON DIOXIDE ENDANGERED HUMAN HEALTH AND WELFARE, THAT IT HAD THE POWER TO REGULATE IT UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT. MARK: THIS IS THE MASSACHUSETTS.>>THE EPA. WELL, THEY PRODUCED AN ENDANGERMENT FINDING, 2009, AND THE ENDANGERMENT FINDING FOR PROSPECTIVE CLIMATE IS 100%, I DIDN’T SAY 90%. I SAID 100% BASED ON THOSE MODELS. SO IF YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT THOSE MODELS SYSTEMATICALLY ARE NOT WORKING, YOU CAN TAKE DOWN THE ENDANGERMENT FINDING, AND THAT WOULD BE THE BASIS FOR ALL THOSE POLICIES THAT CAME OUT OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION. MARK: WHICH WOULD MEAN YOU DON’T GET TO REGULATE –>>ABSOLUTELY. MARK: — CARBON DIOXIDE.>>ABSOLUTELY, THE ENDANGERMENT FINDING IS THE HEART OF THE MATTER. TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA HOW GUNG HO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WAS ON THIS ISSUE. IF YOU LISTEN TO HIS FIRST INAUGURAL SPEECH, JANUARY 20, 2009, IT’S SECOND SUBSTANTIVE PARAGRAPH OF THE SPEECH IS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING, AFTER HEALTH CARE. 90 DAYS AFTER HE FINISHED THAT SPEECH, HIS EPA PRODUCED A PRELIMINARY FINDING OF ENDANGERMENT FROM CARBON DIOXIDE. THEY WERE WORKING ON THIS BEFORE HE WAS PRESIDENT, BUREAUCRATS CAN’T WORK THAT FAST, AND THEN THE FINAL FINDING WAS MADE IN DECEMBER FOR THE CLIMATE CONFERENCE IN COPENHAGEN THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO PRODUCE ANOTHER GLOBAL WARMING. MARK: SO YOU’RE TELLING US THAT WE HAVE A MASSIVE BIT OF PUBLIC POLICY THAT HAS ENORMOUS EFFECT ON SOCIETY THAT’S BUILT ON — I’LL USE MY WORDS, PHONY MODELS.>>BUILT ON A HOUSE OF CARDS. MODELS REALLY DON’T WORK. IF I COULD REALLY BE ARCANE, I COULD EXPLAIN THE MECHANISM AS TO WHY THEY DON’T WORK. MARK: AS LONG AS I UNDERSTAND IT.>>THE MODELS SYSTEMATICALLY PREDICT THAT AS YOU GO UP IN THE ATMOSPHERE IN THE TROPICS WHICH ARE 40% OF THE EARTH THAT THE TEMPERATURE SHOULD RISE DRAMATICALLY AS YOU GO FURTHER UP IN THE ATMOSPHERE. SO WHEN YOU GET TO THE LEVEL OF THE JET STREAM, THE COMPUTER MODELS ARE PREDICTING SEVEN TIMES. I DIDN’T SAY SEVEN-TENTHS OF A DEGREE, I SAID SEVEN TIMES MORE WARMING THAN BEING OBSERVED. WHY AM I BORING YOU WITH THAT? THE VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF TEMPERATURE DETERMINES PRECIPITATION, AND GUESS WHAT? ALMOST ALL THE ATMOSPHERIC MOISTURE THAT WE HAVE AROUND US TODAY IN THE HUMID WASHINGTON, D.C., THAT COMES FROM THE TROPICS. SO IF YOU GET THAT VERTICAL MOTION WRONG, DOWN THERE, YOU GET ALL THE SUBSEQUENT VARIABLES WRONG. IT’S A FANTASTIC SYSTEMATIC ERROR, AND AGAIN, THAT ALONG WITH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SURFACE TEMPERATURES ARE RATHER THE LOWER ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATURES THAN WHAT’S BEING OBSERVED, THAT’S SUFFICIENT TO THE CHEMICAL FINDING. MARK: TO THE AVERAGE PEDESTRIAN LIKE ME, IF YOU GET THAT WRONG, WHAT DOES IT MEAN? YOU GET THE WEATHER MODELS WRONG?>>THE SUBSEQUENT WEATHER WRONG. THAT’S WHY, IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THESE FAMILIES OF MODELS, THEY PREDICT RADICALLY DIFFERENT CHANGES IN PRECIPITATION FROM MODEL TO MODEL. WELL, PROBABLY BECAUSE THEY GOT THE PRECIPITATION INITIALIZATION OUT OF TROPICS WRONG. PRECIPITATION IS IMPORTANT. I OFFER YOU WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA, IF AN EXAMPLE PRECIPITATION IS IMPORTANT COMING FROM THE TROPICS, GET THAT WRONG AND YOU GET THAT THING.>>IS WEATHER GETTING WORSE?>>NO. I LOVE THAT QUESTION BECAUSE WHAT YOU REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT. ROGER PILKE, JR., AT THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DOES. THIS YES, THERE’S MORE DAMAGE FROM WEATHER BECAUSE THERE’S MORE STUFF AND PEOPLE AND PROPERTY IN THE WAY OF WEATHER. SO WHAT YOU REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT ARE WEATHER DAMAGES AS A PERCENT OF GDP. WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT THAT WAY, THERE’S NOTHING WHATSOEVER. I’M SURE HURRICANES ARE GETTING WORSE. I HEARD THAT ON EVERY LEGACY NETWORK DURING FLORENCE AND HARVEY AND ALL THAT STUFF. WELL, FACT OF THE MATTER IS, THERE’S A GUY BY THE NAME OF RYAN MAUI, A HOT SHOT YOUNG TROPICAL METEOROLOGIST, AND A SCHOLAR AT THE CATO INSTITUTE. HE TRACKS THE ENERGY IN THE TROPICAL CYCLONES. SINCE WE GOT GLOBAL RECORDS THAT BEGAN IN 1970, AND YOU WOULD THINK THERE WOULD BE SOME RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THAT INTEGRATED ENERGY AND GLOBAL WARMING AFTER ALL, IT’S ONLY LOGICAL. VICE PRESIDENT GORE SAYS THAT MUST BE THE CASE. IT’S NOT. THERE’S NO RELATIONSHIP WHATSOEVER BETWEEN THE ACCUMULATED CYCLONE ENERGY AND THE SURFACE TEMPERATURE OF THE EARTH. IT’S JUST NOT THERE. NOW, WHAT — WAIT A MINUTE, J DOES OUR GOVERNMENT SAY THIS? THEY SAID IT IN THEIR LAST REPORT CALLED GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IN THE UNITED STATES. THEY SAID, OH, THERE’S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN HURRICANE POWER IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN FROM 1970 TO 2009 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 1980 TO 2009. WAIT A MINUTE. WHY DID YOU STOP IN 2009. IT’S 2014 REPORT. BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE THE DATA AFTER 2009, THE INCREASE GOES BACK TO WHERE IT WAS. WHY DID YOU START IN THE MID 1970s, BECAUSE WE HAVE RECORDS THAT ARE REALLY GOOD BACK TO 1920. IF YOU LOOK AT 1920 TO 1950, YOU SEE AN INCREASE THAT IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE ONE THAT OCCURS. MARK: SO THE INFORMATION THEY’RE PROVIDING US –>>IS SKEWED. IT’S SKEWED. THEY’RE CHERRY PICKING. MARK: HERE WE RELY ON THE CLIMATOLOGISTS AND THEY ARE HYPERPOLITICAL. TONIGHT GET BACK TO THAT AS SOON AS WE RETURN.>>>DON’T FORGET, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU CAN WATCH LEVIN TV ALMOST EVERY WEEK NIGHT BY

100 COMMENTS

  1. Climate change is the game of the political corruption. They waste and earn money out of it. Application is foolish and criminal. Liberal wants ruin the climate but others should save it.

  2. I just saw a rather hilarious ad for Cigna. Ted Danson sword fighting with an unidentified opponent. He announces that he's never done it. The camera turns to face him and he looks into it and tells us that he's keeping his brain well with Cigna. I didn't hear him say that anything had been done about his environmental wacko claim from long ago, therefore his brain malfunction has to be considered as still in effect. Cigna may have stepped in some brain fart excrement, using a nut job for a brain health spokesweenie.

  3. Oh so the ice is not disappearing in thr Arctic? The IPCC predicted the Summer ice would last until 2050 but oh look it is about disappear in the next 10 years. The ice which has been present for 1.7 Million years is about to disappear and frauds like this bozo want us to believe it is all just natural. The Great Barrier Reef coral cover is at the lowest since records began and it is "just a strong El Nino". Permafrost which is tens of thousands of years old is melting and it is just a "natural process". His talk is one long stream of myths and lies, starting with the "Tropospheric Warming but Stratspheric Cooling" myth which has been debunked for 10 years.

    Yes let's use the "Russian Model" because it is a country well known for its free speech and scientific honesty and is in no way dependent on selling fossil fuels to keep an oligarchical elite in power.

    Please upvote to puncture the Fox News bubble of deceit.

  4. he has the gull to answer I DON'T KNOW to Levin's question : then ''what is the cause of C.Change''? he (of course) passed on Geoengineering and the WEAPONIZING OF CLIMATE by the Military Industrial$ Complex, fitting -UN's Depopulation Agenda 2030- euphemistically called ''Sustainable Growth''

  5. Moron deniers can spew all you want, but the fact is we're already seeing the affects….wildfires in California once judged extraordinary now becoming routine, Miami and surrounding areas flooding routinely from the sea, once-in-100-yr storms occurring in multiple cities (NYC, Houston?, New Orleans, etc)., the number of days of snow cover in major mountain chains reduced 20+ days, 'spring' conditions occurring earlier than ever, the hottest years on record in the past 10…I could go on while you idiots stick your fingers in your ears and shout 'la la la'. No less a conservative organization (and one that knows a little something about long-range planning) than the Pentagon and the collective military see this as a major threat. And all you morons can say is that the governments and scientists are in a conspiracy…as if there wasn't infinitely more money on the other side of this argument (oil) and a proven track record of public deception. I wouldn't care about convincing you idiots, but unfortunately those of us with a brain can't secede from the rest of you, so get a #@$%-ing clue and wake up…for your kids' sake if not your own.

  6. He has been a denier over 30 years with money from Cato (Kochs), and Fossil fuel industry., now Fox. Great credentials! Full of it. He’s the one who’s got it wrong! Read up on it!

  7. Interesting how he admits CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) will cause planet warming, but that most of the models are in error. Does that then justify continuing to accelerate the rate at which we pump these gases into our atmosphere? If he is right, that just gives us a bit more time before the inevitable happens, so if we act now, maybe (if you believe this guy) the damage we are doing won't be so severe. Or we can continue down the path of our own demise. Our choice.

  8. Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute,,,wait, the CATO institute? Aren't they the conservative think tank that is anti-democracy? Sorry wing-nuts, (and yes educated idiots like Patrick Michaels,) but 97% of the worlds scientist say that the climate change we are experiencing right now is due to increased CO2 caused by the burning of carbon based fuels such as coal and oil. The other 3% acknowledge climate change but are unsure of the EXACT amount that is influenced by humans. Scientists who have been studying climate all of their lives have more credence with me than a political hack paid by the oil companies!

  9. We live an electric universe and it's the Earth's interaction with the sun that's causing climate change .Plasma interactions affect weather patterns and solar output affect high altitude cloud forcing

  10. Finally! Thank you! You’ve studied, research and worked, and what you’ve determined is scientifically valid unlike mine or any other joe working men conspiracy theory

  11. I'm so glad I found this video! I have been making these exact same arguments for years – and everyone blows me off as a Climate Heretic and Science Denier. Thank you Dr. Michaels!

  12. The Cato Institute is a Wingnut KOOK Libertarin group. Fox 'News' is an ultra right wing propaganda outlet! 

    Here's a partial list of world famous scientists and premier, world class scientific organizations who know a lot more about the SCIENCE than this Charlatan who has exactly ZERO credibility: Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, NASA, the Pentagon, The National Academy of Sciences, the National Research Council, Woods Hole Institute of Oceanography, The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, The British Royal Society (of Science), International Arctic Science Committee, International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences, German Academy of Natural Sciences, Federation of American Sciences, International Research Institute for Climate, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Natural Environment Research UK, Norwegian Academy of Sciences, French Academy of Sciences, British Antarctic Survey, Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, European Academy of Sciences, European Geosciences Union, European Science Foundation, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Astronomical Society, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Institue of Biological Sciences, American Institute of Physics, American Metrological Society, American Society of Civil Engineers, Australian Academy of Sciences, Australian Coral Reef Society, Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Australian Institue of Marine Science, Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, Royal Academies for Sciences Belgium, Royal Academy of Exct, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spin, Royal Astonomical Society, UK, Royal Meteorological Society, UK, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Royal Society of Chemistry, UK, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciencs, Russian Academy of Sciences, Science Council of Japan, Scripp Intitution of Oceanography, World Health Organization

  13. China produces 1/3 of the ocean plastic waste. It’s CO2 emissions are greater than U.S. & Europe combined. If Democrats believe climate change is an existential threat to humanity, why are they proposing draconian curbs on the behavior of Americans and yet ignore China?

  14. I do not support his viewpoint at all; the statistics in actuality support at best a sheer coincidence concerning temperature trends. Yet he sounds convincing, regardless, despite lack of acumen

  15. I love how was debating something that is very skeptical in the actual basis of its facts and findings it shifted all Focus from one thing that is pushy actual pollution toxic chemicals, recycling that's not being done the real work to cleaning up our ecosystem is being ignored but we're only focusing on carbon emissions it is actually the food the plants need to survive and we're now seeing evidence that it has an increased effect and Global Crop Production deserts are Greening, but maybe that's the the real point of all this keep people confused allow Global governments to regulate an outright shut down other countries means of production that is a powerful weapon that they're trying to weaponize right now who are they going to be targeting with this kinds of policy, is it countries like India and most of the countries in the continent of Africa which are the largest populations in New Rising populations with predicted energy needs that will rival both the United States and the European markets and it's quite as trump card to have over countries like China even though that they are one of the worst global polluters air and toxic stuff but waste production global production of trash, I hope people don't continue to be this naive about the potential political power of controlling all energy production over the entire world in a handful of people is monumentally stupid

  16. Exactly as I would expect from Cato since they are funded by the Koch brothers steeped in fossil fuel investments. I believe nothing from Democrats or Republicans or Libertarians organization. Anyone can twist the science… and these groups do.

  17. So the radical right's whole purpose is to gut the EPA on co2 regulation? …By negating the science behind all the predictions but the one that predicts the least gain? Interesting. I hear no specifics about why most of the models would be wrong based on probabilities. So the weather damage is just because there are more people in the way? …from population growth?

    This defies personal observation. Cherry picking talking heads that favor the elite and the status quo have no problem with supporting any denialist rhetoric that comes along. The creativity is marvelous. That's where the money is being made in nae sayer land. The industry that has developed first and foremost is that of denial from right wing deep pockets. Protecting their money trees is the goal.

  18. With no mention of the cycles of the sun this video holds back a lot of what can really be spoken of about climate change, i suggest everyone do research on the grand solar minimum

  19. How can scientists decide the results of an experiment before the experiment has been conducted. That’s not science and all the scientists that follow this they should have all their credentials revoked they are not scientists. They are climate preachers.

  20. I remember years ago when they were interviewing a hurricane specialist about how they got the predictions so wrong about the landfall of Katrina. Early on they were predicting it would hit Corpus Christi… then Galvaston…. then Houston… then Shreveport… and it finally hit New Orleans. The hurricane expert, who stated he was about to retire, said when he first got involved in the science they could predict (I using a fair amount of guess here) 24 hours out where the hurricane would hit within 100 miles. Then they got it to where they could predict 48 hours out to where it would hit withing 50 miles. It further improved to where they could predict a week out to where it would make landfall withing 250 miles. He then said, once the global warming experts got ahold of their computer models they are now lucky if they can predict whether or not the hurricane will hit the planet earth.

  21. Really – you are all going to listen to the experts from the Cato Institute? Nearly everything in this interview is a lie or cherry picked or at best misleading. The models way back in the 80's match with the actual warming. We do not need to look at the Russian models. The lies just keep on coming

  22. THIS is fair and balanced? Sure, this guy is right and the other 97% of climate scientists are wrong. GG fox, quality reporting here.

  23. Ironically human evolution are directly linked to global climate variations. Humans need to keep evolving and we need the climate to be dynamic.

  24. Mark Levin is a Propaganda hack. He probably believes that there is a giant bearded white guy in a toga suit who will fly down from the sky and save him. What a joke he is.

  25. The direct temperature measurements create results for the mean temperature of such large uncertainty that the interpretation depends on which camp you belong to. Anthropogenic atmospheric warming is the most uncertain of the large battery of damages we are inflicting on Gaia, our life blood. But once that became clear, ten years ago, "climate change" replaced "global warming" as the political scientific title of choice. We continue to do terrific damage to our planet, but NOAA is still trying to distract us. Just the corporatocracy at work again ? ?

  26. Where is the summer Arctic sea ice? Why are there fires in Alaska, Northern Canada, Siberia, the Amazon – where there have never been before.  Why have 15 of the warmest years in recorded history been in this century.  Why have sea levels being raising at unprecedented and increasing rates.

    The CATO Institutute is a right wing "think tank" funded by the Koch brothers (one recently died) and other hydrocarbon interests who pay shill "scientists" like Dr. Michaels to raise doubts about the reality of climate change.

    Dr. Michaels, why do you disagree with 99% of other scientists who are specialists in this area? How much money are you being paid by CATO and the hydrocarbon industry? Can we see your tax returns?

  27. A fellow or PhD candidate at any major university sits at the trough of research funding and knows that any conclusions that differ from the man made climate change narrative would be shot down and they would be marginalized. Thus stands the world of academic pursuit and is reflected in the numbers ascribing to the doomsday scenario. It is the Dr. Michaels of the world that can feel free to go against the agenda

  28. A NOAA official presented a Graph of 420,000 years of Ice Core data saying it proved CO2 forced Global Temperature and Sea Level to rise. HOWEVER, he presented the Graph backward. Reversing the Graph actually proves CO2 does NOT force Temperature to rise.
    Wonder why the Media doesn't cover that? BP

  29. Next NOAA added CO2 and Temp lines beyond the right margin to show CO2 and Temp rising rapidly. Analysis of scientific reports show those lines are fake for various reasons. Nobody addresses that either . BP

  30. I think he makes a good point that there's just "more stuff." I had a job at a car dealership for a while and I couldn't stand walking around the lot in the summer because of all the concrete, metal and glass resonating dry heat – it was unbearably hot in the summer and going inside one of the cars was hell. As soon as I arrived home where there was more trees, grass and I was near a river, the temperature was 5 degrees cooler. When I was visiting Europe during a heatwave, the city was suffocating hot, but walking through a forest felt a lot cooler. Cities just feel way hotter than forests.

  31. cat-5 hurricane 1936–cat 5-2019.same. heat the same. in sep. in winter is 5 below. same
    snowstorms worse in years before. companys doing better in the USA. look at china

  32. Tony Heller makes similar comments concerning the manipulation of data by government agencies. Data manipulation is a fact, for example the university of East Anglia, UK was found to have done so. The Obama EPA activities stemming from the SCOTUS decision mentioned in the video certainly accelerated the global warming agenda. Spending potentially trillions of dollars worldwide to minimize or solve a problem should be considered only if there is a problem and if we have the ability to effect change. Otherwise, we are placing an inordinate amount of power in the hands of people whose foremost concern is power.

  33. Does anyone know here how close we are to extinction?
    If the whole world World live like the USA, we would need five Earth to substain. Five earth. Thats how far we live beyond our means.
    Think about what would the conseques would be. Maybe the place where you live right now, is no longer inhabital in some years.
    No politics. No plan or agenda. It’s about us, humanity.

  34. Okay first of all, the fact that these "models" are not 100% accurate does not change the fact that WE ARE observing a rise of temperatures, just as the graph that you display shows it. Secondly, what does the fact that this programmes are not extremely effective have to do with "the truth about global warming"? The temperatures are still rising because of human actions, Mr. Michaels says it himself. I will skip the fact that the video is unnecessarily politicized since we are talking about scientific facts which have nothing, or should have little to do with anyones opinion to say that, as a conclusion, I believe that the video does give some insight about climate change, but that is faaaaaar from being "The truth about global warming". It merely focuses on a very small range of topics and details related to it, and should therefore be watched with perspective.

  35. Like the assaults on our children at school and in concerts designed to make laws of oppression like gun control.
    And politicarsfting fake issues with climate just to make money and control us in one punch below the belt.

  36. It has been years since I ask just where the instruments to measure the "climate" were placed. As of today still no answer. However, some were placed behind some distance at airport warm up pads. Go figure. By the way Al Gore has become very rich with the scam.

  37. Now remove the global warming costs factor from the costs of production and jail the confidence tricksters who foisted these costs on to humanity with lies and subterfuge. Who are the individuals who have the power to pull off such a mammoth theft from the public?

  38. Earth has been warming up, on it's own, since the ice age. The fact that politicians make an issue of it shows what they are about. Panic…

  39. Works for Koch funded Cato— not independent scientist. He’s considered to be an outlier in scientific community. Sure he sounds like a scientist but he’s an advocate for Fossil fuel industry. He only cites to other Cato scientists to support him!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here