Great Global Warming Swindle The

en
00:00:01 Downloaded From www.moviesubtitles.org
00:00:13 When people say we don't believe
00:00:15 I say no, I believe in global warming,
00:00:17 I don't believe that human CO2
00:00:20 A few years ago,
00:00:22 I would tell you it's CO2.
00:00:24 Because just like everyone
00:00:26 I listen to what the media have to say.
00:00:29 Each day, the news reports
00:00:34 politicians no longer dare to express
00:00:39 There is such intolerance...
00:00:41 of any dissenting voice...
00:00:44 ...some of the worst climate
00:00:47 This is the most pollitically
00:00:51 is to doubt this climate
00:00:54 Climate change has gone
00:00:58 it is a new kind of morality.
00:01:00 The Prime Minister is back
00:01:03 unrepentant and unembarrassed
00:01:09 Yes, as the frenzy of a man-made
00:01:13 many senior climate scientists
00:01:16 basis for the theory is crumbling.
00:01:19 There were periods for example
00:01:22 when we had three times as
00:01:24 or periods when we had ten times
00:01:27 and if CO2 has a large effect on climate
00:01:30 then you should see it in the
00:01:33 If we look at climate from
00:01:37 We would never suspect CO2
00:01:40 None of the major climate changes
00:01:44 ...can be explained by CO2.
00:01:47 You can't say that CO2
00:01:50 It surely never did in the past.
00:01:53 I've often heard it's said that there is
00:01:57 ...on the global warming issue
00:02:00 catastrophic changes
00:02:03 Well, I am one scientist and
00:02:05 ...think that is not true.
00:02:07 Man-made global warming
00:02:10 This morning, the Intergovernmental
00:02:13 It is presented in the media as
00:02:16 of an impressive international organization:
00:02:19 "From the IPCC..."
00:02:20 The United Nations Intergovernmental
00:02:25 The IPCC, line any UN body,
00:02:29 the final conclusions
00:02:33 This claim, that the IPCC is the world's
00:02:38 or two thousand five hundred scientists...
00:02:41 you look at the bibliographies of the
00:02:45 There are quite a number
00:02:48 And to build the number up
00:02:50 they had to start taking group reviewers
00:02:54 anyone who ever came
00:02:57 and none of them are asked
00:03:02 Those people who are specialists
00:03:06 and resigned (and there have
00:03:09 they are simply put
00:03:12 and become part of these two thousand
00:03:16 People have decided they have
00:03:19 that since no scientist desagrees,
00:03:23 But that, whenever you
00:03:26 that's pure propaganda.
00:03:29 This is the story of how
00:03:32 ...turned into a political ideology.
00:03:36 I don't even like to call it the
00:03:39 because really it is a
00:03:41 and they have become hugely
00:03:48 It is the story of the distortion
00:03:52 Climate scientists need there to be
00:03:56 We have a vested interest in
00:04:01 money will flow to climate science.
00:04:04 There's one thing you
00:04:08 this might not be a problem.
00:04:11 It is the story of how a
00:04:14 ...turned into a burocratic
00:04:17 The fact to the matter is that
00:04:20 ...depend upon global
00:04:23 It's a big business.
00:04:26 It's become a great
00:04:30 and if the whole global
00:04:33 there would be an awful
00:04:36 out of jobs and looking
00:04:40 This is a story of censorship
00:04:44 I've seen and heard that
00:04:49 who might
00:04:51 which is not the scientific way.
00:04:55 It is the story of Westeners invoking
00:05:00 to hinder vital industrial
00:05:03 One clear thing that emerges from
00:05:09 is the point that there's somebody
00:05:14 And the African dream is to develop.
00:05:17 The environmental movement has evolved
00:05:23 for preventing development
00:05:29 The global warming story
00:05:33 ...of how a media scare became
00:05:38 The whole global warming business
00:05:43 and people who disagree
00:05:48 I'm a heretic.
00:05:50 The makers of this program,
00:06:01 In 2005, a House of Lords enquiry
00:06:05 the scientific evidence of
00:06:08 A leading figure in that enquiry
00:06:12 who as Chancellor of the Exchequer
00:06:16 to commit government money
00:06:20 We had a very very thorough
00:06:24 from a whole lot of people expert
00:06:29 What surprised me was to discover how
00:06:34 In fact, there are more and
00:06:38 some of them a little bit frightened
00:06:42 but who quietly privately and
00:06:46 "hang on, wait a minute:
00:06:51 We are told that the Earth's
00:06:57 but the Earth's climate
00:07:00 In Earth's long history, there have
00:07:03 when it was much warmer
00:07:07 when much of the world was
00:07:10 or else vasts ice sheets.
00:07:12 The climate has always changed,
00:07:16 from us, humans.
00:07:18 We can trace the present warming
00:07:23 to the end of a very cold
00:07:26 This cold spell?
00:07:28 It's known to climatologists
00:07:37 In the 14th century, Europe
00:07:42 and when we look for evidences of this,
00:07:47 and pictures of old father Thames
00:07:51 because during the hardest and
00:07:56 the Thames would freeze over
00:08:01 held on the Thames
00:08:04 selling things on the ice.
00:08:10 If we look back further in time,
00:08:13 We find a barmy golden era
00:08:15 when temperatures where
00:08:17 a time known to climatologists
00:08:27 It's important people know
00:08:31 a quite different lifestyle
00:08:36 We have this view today that warming is
00:08:41 In fact, wherever you describe
00:08:45 it appears to be associated
00:08:49 In Europe, this was the great age
00:08:53 a time when, according to Chaucer,
00:08:55 vineyards flourished even
00:08:58 All over the City on London there
00:09:03 that grew in the medieval warm period,
00:09:07 So this was a wonderfully rich time.
00:09:10 And this little church, in a
00:09:12 as it comes from a period
00:09:16 Going back in time further still,
00:09:20 we find more warm spells?
00:09:23 including a very prolonged period
00:09:26 known to geologists as
00:09:29 where temperatures were significantly...
00:09:31 higher than they are now
00:09:35 If we go back 8000 years
00:09:38 our current interglacial, who is
00:09:41 now the polar bears obviously
00:09:44 they are with us today
00:09:46 they are very adaptable and
00:09:49 (we call hipsy thermals),
00:09:55 Climate variation in the
00:09:59 so why do we think is
00:10:04 In the current alarm about
00:10:06 the culprit is industrial society.
00:10:09 Thanks to modern industry luxuries
00:10:13 are now available in abundance
00:10:16 Novel technologies have made
00:10:19 modern transport and communications
00:10:23 ...seem less foreign and distant.
00:10:25 Industrial progress has
00:10:28 But has it also changed
00:10:32 According to the theory of
00:10:34 industrial growth should cause
00:10:38 but does it?
00:10:40 Anyone who goes around and says
00:10:44 ...of the warming of the 20th century...
00:10:47 hasn't looked at the
00:10:53 Industrial production in the early
00:10:57 ...was still in its infancy restricted
00:11:00 handicapped by war and
00:11:04 After the Second World War
00:11:07 Consumer goods like refrigerators and
00:11:11 began to be mass-produced
00:11:16 Historians call this global
00:11:19 the post-war economic boom.
00:11:23 So how does the industrial story
00:11:27 Since the mid 19th century
00:11:30 has risen by just of a
00:11:34 But this warming began
00:11:36 and planes were even invented:
00:11:40 What's more, most of the rise in
00:11:44 during the period when
00:11:47 was relatively insignificant.
00:11:50 After the Second Wold War,
00:11:52 during the post-war economic boom,
00:11:54 temperatures, in theory,
00:11:57 but they didn't,
00:11:59 not for one or two years,
00:12:03 In fact, paradoxically, it wasn't
00:12:05 economic recession in the 1970's
00:12:11 CO2 began increase
00:12:16 but the temperature actually
00:12:22 continued to about 1975
00:12:28 When the CO2 increasing rapidly
00:12:35 then we cannot say that CO2
00:12:40 Temperature went up significantly
00:12:43 ...when human production
00:12:46 and then in the post war years,
00:12:49 and the whole economies
00:12:52 and human production
00:12:55 the global temperature
00:12:57 In other words: the facts
00:13:02 Trusted time when,
00:13:03 after the Second World War
00:13:06 CO2 was increasing and yet
00:13:12 and starting off scares of
00:13:16 it made absolutely no sense,
00:13:21 Why do we suppose that CO2 is
00:13:28 CO2 forms only a very small
00:13:32 In fact we measure changes
00:13:35 in tenths of parts per million.
00:13:39 If you take CO2 as a percentage
00:13:43 --the Oxygen, the Nitrogen
00:13:46 ...is 0.054 percent
00:13:49 and it's an incredibly small portion
00:13:51 and then of course you've got
00:13:53 that supposedly humans are adding
00:13:55 (which is the focus of all the concern)
00:13:57 and it gets even smaller.
00:14:00 Although CO2 is a greenhouse gas,
00:14:02 greenhouse gases themselves only
00:14:06 What's more, CO2 is a relatively
00:14:10 The atmosphere is made up
00:14:14 a small percentage of them
00:14:17 and of that very small percentage
00:14:20 a 95% of it is water vapour, it's the
00:14:24 Water vapour is a greenhouse gas, by
00:14:30 So is there any way of checking whether
00:14:33 to an increase in greenhouse gas?
00:14:36 There is only one way to tell and
00:14:41 or a part of the sky known to
00:14:46 If it's greenhouse warming,
00:14:49 in the middle of the troposphere
00:14:52 (the first 10-12 km of the atmosphere)
00:14:54 than you do at the surface.
00:14:56 There are good theoretical
00:14:59 having to do with how
00:15:03 The greenhouse effect
00:15:05 the Sun sends its heat
00:15:07 if it weren't for greenhouse gases,
00:15:09 this solar radiation would
00:15:12 leaving the planet cold
00:15:15 Greenhouse gas traps the scaping
00:15:19 a few miles above the surface.
00:15:22 And it's here, according
00:15:24 the rate of warming should be highest
00:15:26 if it's greenhouse gas
00:15:31 All the models, everyone of them,
00:15:33 calculates that the warming
00:15:36 as you go up from the surface
00:15:42 That in fact the maximum warming
00:15:44 over the Equator should take place
00:15:52 A scientist largely responsible
00:15:55 in the Earth's atmosphere
00:15:58 In 1991 he was awarded NASA's medal
00:16:03 and in 1996 received a special award from
00:16:09 for fundamentally advancing
00:16:16 He was a lead author...
00:16:17 on the UN's Intergovernmental
00:16:26 There are two ways to take
00:16:28 in the Earth's atmosphere:
00:16:35 What we found consistently is that,
00:16:40 the bulk of the atmosphere
00:16:44 we see at the surface in this region.
00:16:46 And that's a real head
00:16:48 because the theory is
00:16:52 and the theory says that
00:16:55 the upper atmosphere
00:16:58 The rise in temperature of that
00:17:01 ...is not very dramatic at all and
00:17:05 ...that climate models are
00:17:10 One of the problems thas is plaguing
00:17:13 as you go up through the atmosphere
00:17:17 that the rate of warming increases
00:17:20 and it's quite clear, from two datasets,
00:17:23 not just satellite data
00:17:24 which everybody talks about,
00:17:28 that you dont' see that effect.
00:17:31 In fact it looks like the surface
00:17:34 more than the upper air temperatures:
00:17:37 that's a big difference!!
00:17:38 That data gives you a handle
00:17:43 is warming that probably is
00:17:47 That is, the observations do not
00:17:51 In fact, most observations show a slight
00:17:58 So in that sense you can say that the
00:18:04 is falsified by the evidence.
00:18:09 So the recent warming of
00:18:11 ...in the wrong place and
00:18:14 Most of the warming took place
00:18:17 and ocurred mostly at
00:18:20 the very opposite of what
00:18:22 according to the theory of
00:18:27 I am Al Gore, I used to be Vicepresident
00:18:32 Former Vicepresident Al Gore's
00:18:37 ...is regarded by many as the definite
00:18:41 of the man-made global warming.
00:18:44 His argument rests on one all
00:18:47 taken from icecore surveys in which
00:18:52 to look back into Earth's
00:18:54 hundreds of thousands of years.
00:18:57 The first icecore survey took place
00:19:00 what it found, as Al Gore
00:19:04 ...was a clear correlation
00:19:10 We're going back in time
00:19:13 Here's what the temperature
00:19:18 Now one thing that comes and jumps
00:19:23 (most ridiculous thing
00:19:26 The relationship is actually
00:19:29 but there is one relationship
00:19:33 than all the others and it is this:
00:19:35 when there's more CO2 the
00:19:39 Al Gore says the relationship
00:19:42 ...and CO2 is complicated
00:19:44 but he doesn't say what
00:19:47 In fact, there was something
00:19:50 in the icecore data that
00:19:53 Professor Clark is a leading Arctic
00:19:57 into the Earth's temperature record
00:20:02 When we look at the climate
00:20:04 we're looking for
00:20:06 that actually records climate.
00:20:08 If we were to take an ice sample
00:20:11 to reconstruct temperature but the
00:20:15 in that ice we liberate it and
00:20:19 Professor Clark and others
00:20:22 as Al Gore says,
00:20:23 a link between CO2
00:20:27 But what al Gore doesn't say...
00:20:29 is that the link is the
00:20:32 So here we're looking at the
00:20:36 and in the red we see temperature
00:20:39 to later time at a very key interval
00:20:42 when we came out of a glaciation.
00:20:45 And we see the temperature going up
00:20:50 CO2 lags behind that increase.
00:20:53 It's got a 800 year lag...
00:20:55 ...so temperature is leading
00:21:00 There have now been several
00:21:03 everyone of them shows
00:21:06 the temperature rises or falls,
00:21:09 after a few hundred years,
00:21:12 So obviously, CO2 is not the
00:21:17 In fact we can say that the warming
00:21:23 CO2 clearly cannot be causing
00:21:27 it's a product of temperature.
00:21:29 it's following temperature
00:21:32 The icecore record goes
00:21:35 ...of the problem we have here.
00:21:37 They said: "if the CO2 increases
00:21:41 ...as a greenhouse gas,
00:21:45 But the icecore record
00:21:48 so the fundamental assumption,
00:21:51 ...of the whole theory
00:21:54 ...due tu humans,
00:21:58 But how can it be that
00:22:01 to more CO2 in the atmosphere?
00:22:04 To understand this,
00:22:06 the obvious point that CO2
00:22:10 ...produced by all living things.
00:22:13 Few things annoy me more
00:22:16 talking about CO2
00:22:20 you are made of CO2,
00:22:24 CO2 is how living things grow.
00:22:28 What's more, humans are not
00:22:32 Humans produce a small fraction
00:22:37 of the CO2 that it is produced
00:22:41 Volcanos produce more CO2 each year
00:22:46 and other sources of man-made
00:22:51 More still comes from
00:22:53 which produce about a 150
00:22:57 compared to a mere 6.5
00:23:01 An even larger source of CO2
00:23:04 from falling leaves for example
00:23:08 But the biggest source of CO2
00:23:17 Carl Wunsch is Professor
00:23:20 He was also a Visiting Professor...
00:23:22 ...in Oceanography
00:23:24 ...and University College in London,
00:23:27 in Mathematics and Physics
00:23:32 He's the author of four major
00:23:36 The ocean is the major
00:23:41 ...when it comes out
00:23:44 or to, from which it is readmitted
00:23:49 If you heat the surface of the
00:23:55 So similarly if you cool
00:23:59 ...the ocean can dissolve
00:24:04 So the warmer the oceans,
00:24:07 and the cooler they are,
00:24:10 But why is there a timelag
00:24:13 between a change in temperature
00:24:17 ...going into or out of the sea?
00:24:20 The reason is that oceans
00:24:24 they take literally hundreds
00:24:26 ...to warm up and to cool down.
00:24:29 This timelag means the oceans
00:24:33 ...a memory of temperature changes.
00:24:36 The ocean has a memory of past events,
00:24:39 running out as far as
00:24:44 so for example if somebody says:
00:24:46 "Oh, I'm seeing changes
00:24:49 ...this must mean that the
00:24:53 it may only mean that
00:24:55 ...in a remote part of the ocean
00:24:58 whose effects are now beginning
00:25:04 The current warming
00:25:05 ...before people had cars
00:25:08 In the past 150 years,
00:25:10 the temperature has risen
00:25:13 But most of that rise
00:25:17 Since that time, the
00:25:20 has fallen for four decades,
00:25:24 There's no evidence at all...
00:25:25 ...from Earth's long
00:25:27 ...that CO2 has ever determined
00:25:32 But if CO2 doesn't drive
00:25:42 The common belief that CO2
00:25:45 is at odds with much of
00:25:50 Data from weather
00:25:52 from icecore surveys and from
00:25:58 But if CO2 isn't driving climate,
00:26:05 Isn't it bizarre the thing
00:26:07 you know when we're filling apart car,
00:26:11 that we are the ones
00:26:13 Just look in the sky, look at
00:26:20 Even humans, at
00:26:24 are minute relative to that.
00:26:29 In the late 1980's, solar physicist
00:26:33 a radically new way of
00:26:37 Despite the huge resources
00:26:40 Corbin's new technique consistently
00:26:45 He was held in the national press
00:26:50 The secret of his success
00:26:54 The origin of solar weather technique
00:26:57 came originally from study of sunspots
00:27:00 and the desire to predict those,
00:27:02 ...and then I realized there was
00:27:05 ...to use the Sun to
00:27:14 Sunspots, we now know,
00:27:17 ...which appear at times
00:27:22 But for many hundreds of years,
00:27:24 long before this was
00:27:26 the astronomers around
00:27:28 ...the number of
00:27:30 ...that more spots
00:27:34 In 1893 the British astronomer
00:27:38 that during the Little Ice Age
00:27:41 any spots visible on the Sun.
00:27:43 A period of solar inactivity
00:27:47 ...the Maunder Minimum.
00:27:49 But how reliable are sunspots
00:27:55 I decided to test it by gambling
00:27:59 against what the Met Office
00:28:02 a normal expectation.
00:28:04 And I won money month after
00:28:08 Last winter the Met Office
00:28:12 ...or would be an
00:28:15 We said: "no, that is nonsense,
00:28:18 and we specifically said
00:28:22 after Christmas and February:
00:28:26 In 1991, senior scientists of the
00:28:30 decided to compile a record
00:28:34 and compare it with the
00:28:38 What they found, was an
00:28:41 between what the
00:28:43 and changes in temperature
00:28:46 Solar activity they found
00:28:51 fell back for four decades
00:28:54 ...and then rose again after that.
00:29:00 When we saw this correlation...
00:29:03 between the temperature and
00:29:08 then the people said to us:
00:29:10 "OK, it can be just a coincidence",
00:29:12 so how can we prove that
00:29:16 Well, one obvious thing is
00:29:19 ...or different timeseries
00:29:24 So Professor Friis Christensen
00:29:27 ...four hundreds years
00:29:30 to compare sunspot activity...
00:29:32 ...against temperature variation.
00:29:35 Once again, they found...
00:29:36 that variations in solar activity...
00:29:38 were intimate linked...
00:29:39 ...to temperature
00:29:42 It was the Sun, it seemed,
00:29:46 that was driving changes
00:29:50 In a way, it's not surprising:
00:29:52 the Sun affects us directly...
00:29:54 ...of course when it
00:29:57 But we now know...
00:29:58 the Sun also affects
00:30:03 Clouds have a powerful cooling effect,
00:30:06 but how are they formed?
00:30:07 In the early 20th century
00:30:10 the Earth was constantly
00:30:12 ...by subatomic particles.
00:30:15 These particles, which
00:30:18 originated (it was believed)
00:30:22 far beyond our Solar System.
00:30:25 When the particles coming down
00:30:27 meet water vapour rising
00:30:29 they form water droplets
00:30:33 But when the Sun
00:30:35 and the solar wind is strong,
00:30:37 fewer particles get through
00:30:44 Just how powerful
00:30:46 became clear only recently,
00:30:48 when an astrophysicist,
00:30:51 ...decided to compare
00:30:53 of cloud-forming
00:30:55 with the temperature record
00:30:58 Professor Jan Veizer...
00:30:59 ...going back six hundred
00:31:03 What they found was that
00:31:06 ...the temperature went down;
00:31:08 when cosmic rays went down,
00:31:12 Clouds and the Earth's climate
00:31:16 To see how close,
00:31:19 We just compared the graph,
00:31:21 just put them one upon the other
00:31:23 and it was just amazing
00:31:26 We have very explosive data here.
00:31:29 I've never seen such a
00:31:33 coming together
00:31:35 to show really what's happening
00:31:39 The climate was controlled
00:31:42 The clouds were controlled
00:31:45 and the cosmic rays were
00:31:50 It all came down to the Sun.
00:31:56 If you had X-ray eyes
00:32:00 what appears as a nice
00:32:03 ...would appear like a raging tiger.
00:32:13 The Sun is an incredibly
00:32:17 ..and is raying out great
00:32:22 and puffs of gas...
00:32:25 ...and endless solar wind...
00:32:28 that's forever rushing
00:32:31 There, in a certain sense,
00:32:33 inside the atmosphere
00:32:37 the intensity of its magnetic
00:32:40 more than doubled...
00:32:42 ...during the 20th century.
00:32:46 In 2005, astrophysicists
00:32:50 published the following graph...
00:32:52 in the official Journal of the
00:32:55 The blue line represents
00:32:57 in the Arctic over the
00:33:01 and here is the rising CO2
00:33:06 The two are not
00:33:09 But now look again at
00:33:12 and at this red line...
00:33:13 which depicts variations
00:33:16 over the past century as recorded
00:33:20 from NASA and American's
00:33:23 ...and Atmospheric Administration.
00:33:25 Solar activity over the
00:33:27 or over the last several
00:33:29 correlates very nicely
00:33:32 with sea ice and Arctic
00:33:36 To the Harvard astrophysicists...
00:33:38 and many other scientists
00:33:42 The Sun is driving
00:33:45 CO2 is irrelevant.
00:33:48 But why, if this is so, are we
00:33:52 with news items about
00:33:55 Why do so many people
00:33:57 and elsewhere regard it
00:34:02 To understand the power
00:34:05 we must tell the story
00:34:15 "The weather satellite depicts
00:34:18 ...for his lost harvests
00:34:21 Doom laid and predictions...
00:34:22 about climate change
00:34:25 In 1974 the BBC warned us of
00:34:28 that might seem
00:34:30 Again and again,
00:34:32 have been showing us
00:34:34 ...the American Midwest suffered...
00:34:36 ...its worst droughts
00:34:38 ...and tornados were
00:34:41 And what was going to be
00:34:44 The man behind the series was...
00:34:46 former New Scientist Editor,
00:34:49 In "The weather Machine"
00:34:52 ...the mainstream
00:34:55 ...which was global cooling and
00:34:59 "Nature's ice dwarfs us and..."
00:35:02 After four decades of
00:35:05 experts warn that
00:35:07 ...would have catastrophic
00:35:09 "There's the ever-present
00:35:12 Will a new ice age
00:35:15 ...and bury our Northern cities?"
00:35:17 But in mid to doom and gloom
00:35:19 there was one voice of hope:
00:35:21 a Swedish scientist called Bert Bolin,
00:35:24 ...tentatively suggested
00:35:27 might help to warm the world,
00:35:29 although he wasn't sure:
00:35:31 And there's a lot of oil,
00:35:33 and there are vast
00:35:35 and they seem to be burning
00:35:38 and if we go on doing this,
00:35:40 in about fifty years time,
00:35:43 a few degrees warmer
00:35:45 we just don't know.
00:35:47 We were also the first to put
00:35:49 Bert Bolin of Sweden
00:35:54 talking about the dangers of CO2
00:35:57 and I remember being bitterly
00:36:01 ...for indulging him
00:36:05 At the height of the
00:36:09 Bert Bolin's eccentric theory...
00:36:11 of man-made global
00:36:14 two things happened
00:36:17 First, temperatures
00:36:20 and second, the miners
00:36:29 To Margaret Thatcher,
00:36:30 energy was a political problem.
00:36:32 In the early 70's the oil crisis had
00:36:36 and the miners had dropped down...
00:36:37 Ted Heath's conservative government
00:36:40 Mrs. Thatcher was determined
00:36:44 she set out to break their power.
00:36:47 "What we have seen in this country...
00:36:50 is the emergence of an
00:36:55 who are prepared to exploit industrial
00:37:01 the breakdown of law and order
00:37:03 and the distraction of democratic
00:37:07 The politization of this subject...
00:37:09 started with Margaret Thatcher.
00:37:13 She was very concerned, always
00:37:15 (I remember when I was Secretary
00:37:18 to promote nuclear power,
00:37:20 long before the issue of
00:37:24 because she was concerned
00:37:28 and she didn't trust the Middle East
00:37:30 and she didn't trust the
00:37:32 so she didn't trust oil
00:37:35 so therefore she thought
00:37:37 ...to push ahead with nuclear power.
00:37:40 And then, when the climate change
00:37:44 she thought this is great,
00:37:45 this is another argument
00:37:47 because it doesn't have
00:37:49 this is another argument
00:37:52 and that is what she
00:37:54 it's been misrepresented
00:37:56 And so she said to the scientists,
00:37:58 she went to the Royal Society
00:38:00 "there's money on the table
00:38:06 so of course they went
00:38:09 Inevitably the moment politicians
00:38:12 put that weight behind something
00:38:14 and attach their name to
00:38:17 money will flow,
00:38:20 and inevitably research,
00:38:24 started to bubble up
00:38:26 which are going to
00:38:29 but with a particular emphasis
00:38:31 on the relationship between
00:38:35 At the request of Mrs. Thatcher,
00:38:37 the UK Met Office set up
00:38:40 which provided the basis...
00:38:41 for a new international
00:38:44 the Intergovernmental Panel
00:38:49 They came out with the first big report
00:38:53 which predicted climatic disaster
00:38:56 as a result of global warming
00:38:58 I remember going to the
00:39:02 and being amazed by two things:
00:39:05 first, the simplicity and
00:39:09 (and the vigour with which was delivered)
00:39:12 and secondly, the total disregard
00:39:16 of all climate science up to that time,
00:39:20 including incidentally
00:39:24 which had been the subject
00:39:28 at the Royal Society just
00:39:33 But the new emphasis
00:39:36 as a possible environmental problem
00:39:38 didn't just appeal to Mrs. Thatcher.
00:39:42 It was certainly something very favourable
00:39:46 to the environmental idea,
00:39:48 what I call the medieval
00:39:51 a sort of "let's get back
00:39:53 to the way things were
00:39:56 and get rid of all these
00:39:59 They loved it, because
00:40:03 ...an emblem of industrialization.
00:40:07 While CO2 clearly is
00:40:10 and tried and self-tied
00:40:16 with transportation in cars,
00:40:22 and there are forces in the
00:40:26 that are simply against
00:40:29 they think that's bad.
00:40:32 It could be used to
00:40:34 a whole sweet of myths
00:40:37 anticar, antigrowth,
00:40:41 and, above all, anti that
00:40:48 Patrick Moore is considered...
00:40:49 one of the foremost
00:40:51 ...of his generation.
00:40:52 He is co-founder of Greenpeace.
00:40:55 The shift to climate being
00:40:58 came about for two
00:41:01 the first reason was
00:41:04 a majority of people now agreed
00:41:08 we in the environmental movement
00:41:11 now when a majority of
00:41:14 it's pretty hard to remain
00:41:17 and so the only way to remain
00:41:20 to adopt ever more
00:41:23 When I left Greenpeace it was
00:41:26 adopting a campaign to
00:41:29 Like I said: "You guys,
00:41:31 this is one of the elements
00:41:34 I mean, I'm not sure
00:41:36 to be banning a whole element".
00:41:40 The other reason that environmental
00:41:43 was because world communism failed,
00:41:45 the wall came down,
00:41:46 and a lot of peaceniks
00:41:49 moved into the environmental movement,
00:41:51 bringing their neo-marxism with them
00:41:54 and learnt to use green language
00:41:55 in a very clever way
00:41:56 to cloak agendas that
00:41:59 to do with anticapitalism
00:42:02 than they do anything
00:42:04 The left have been
00:42:08 by the manifest failure
00:42:12 and indeed marxo-communism
00:42:15 as it was tried out,
00:42:17 and therefore they still remain
00:42:21 but they have to find new
00:42:24 And it was a kind of
00:42:29 from Margaret Thatcher
00:42:33 through to bioleft wing
00:42:39 That created this kind
00:42:44 ...behind a looney idea.
00:42:48 By the early 1990's
00:42:51 was no longer a slightly
00:42:54 it was a full-blown
00:42:57 it was attracting media
00:43:00 more governmental funding.
00:43:02 Prior to Bush the elder,
00:43:05 I think the level of
00:43:09 and climate-related
00:43:12 somewhere around the
00:43:15 which is reasonable for
00:43:18 it jumped to two billion a year:
00:43:21 more than a factor of ten
00:43:25 and yes, that changed
00:43:29 lot of jobs, it brought a lot of new people
00:43:33 into it who otherwise
00:43:36 so you develop whole cadres
00:43:39 only interest in the field was that...
00:43:42 ...it was global warming.
00:43:45 If I wanted to do research on,
00:43:47 shall we say,
00:43:51 what I would do,
00:43:54 and this is anytime
00:43:57 I would write my grant
00:44:01 "I want to investigate...
00:44:03 the not-gathering
00:44:07 with special reference
00:44:09 to the effects of
00:44:12 and that way I get my money...
00:44:14 if I forget to mention
00:44:16 I might not get the money.
00:44:18 There's a question in my mind...
00:44:20 that the large amounts of money
00:44:22 that have been fed into this particular,
00:44:24 rather small area of science
00:44:26 have distorted the
00:44:29 We're all competing for funds
00:44:32 and if your field is the
00:44:38 then you have done much
00:44:41 why your field should be funded.
00:44:52 By the 1990's tenths of billions of dollars of government
00:44:55 funding in the US,
00:44:58 were being diverted into
00:44:59 research relating
00:45:01 A large portion of those funds
00:45:03 went into building computer models
00:45:05 to forecast what the climate
00:45:08 But how accurate are those models?
00:45:11 Doctor Roy Spencer
00:45:12 is a senior scientist
00:45:14 at NASA's Marshall
00:45:17 he has been awarded medals
00:45:18 for exceptional scientific achievement
00:45:20 in both NASA
00:45:21 and the American
00:45:25 Climate models are only as good
00:45:27 as the assumptions that go into them,
00:45:28 and they have hundreds of assumptions.
00:45:30 All it takes as one assumption
00:45:31 to be wrong for the forecast
00:45:34 Climate forecasts are not new,
00:45:36 but in the past scientists
00:45:39 about their ability to
00:45:42 "Any attempt of forecasting
00:45:44 meets skepticism from the men
00:45:46 who model the weather by computer."
00:45:48 In making decisions
00:45:50 a bad prediction as to what...
00:45:52 the climate of the future will be,
00:45:54 can be far worse than none at all.
00:45:56 I'm afraid that our understanding
00:45:58 of the complex weather machine
00:46:00 is not yet good enough to make
00:46:02 a reliable statement of the future.
00:46:08 All models assume that man-made CO2
00:46:11 is the main cause of climate change,
00:46:13 rather than the Sun or the clouds.
00:46:16 The analogy I use is like my car
00:46:18 is not running very well
00:46:20 so I'm going to ignore
00:46:22 and I'm gonna ignore the transmission
00:46:24 which is the water vapour
00:46:26 and I'm gonna look at one
00:46:27 knot at the right rear wheel
00:46:28 which is the human-produced CO2.
00:46:30 It's that, the science is that bad.
00:46:36 If you haven't understood
00:46:39 If you haven't understood
00:46:41 that cause the increase
00:46:42 the solar, the CO2, the
00:46:47 and put it all together,
00:46:49 If we haven't got all that
00:46:51 then your model isn't
00:46:54 The range of climate
00:46:58 These variations are
00:47:01 altering the assumptions upon
00:47:04 The runs are so complicated
00:47:07 in such a way that they
00:47:11 I work with modellers,
00:47:14 with a mathematical model
00:47:17 you can model anything,
00:47:20 you can make it get colder
00:47:25 Since all the models assume
00:47:27 that man-made CO2
00:47:29 one obvious way to produce
00:47:32 is to increase the amount
00:47:35 CO2 going into the atmosphere.
00:47:37 We put an increase in CO2
00:47:41 it's been 0.49% per year
00:47:45 0.42 for the ten years before that
00:47:48 0.43 for the ten years before that,
00:47:50 so the models have twice as much
00:47:52 greenhouse warming
00:47:56 as is known to be happening.
00:47:58 It shouldn't shock that they predict
00:48:00 more warming than is ocurring.
00:48:06 Models predict what the temperature
00:48:08 might be in fifty or a hundred years time.
00:48:11 It is one of their peculiars features
00:48:13 that long-range climate forecasts
00:48:15 are only proved wrong long
00:48:17 after peope have
00:48:19 As a result, there is a danger,
00:48:21 according to Professor Carl Wunsch
00:48:23 that modellers will we less concerned
00:48:25 in producing a forecast that is accurate
00:48:27 than one that is interesting.
00:48:30 Even within the scientific community,
00:48:32 you see, it's a problem.
00:48:34 If I run a complicated model
00:48:38 like melt a lot of ice into the ocean
00:48:41 and nothing happens,
00:48:44 it's not likely to get printed.
00:48:46 But if I run the same model
00:48:49 in such a way that something dramatic
00:48:51 happens to the ocean circulation
00:48:53 like the heat transport turns off
00:48:56 it will be published, people will say:
00:48:58 "This is very exciting"
00:49:00 and will even be picked up by the media.
00:49:02 So there's a bias,
00:49:05 within the media and within
00:49:06 the science community itself
00:49:07 towards results which
00:49:15 If all freezes over,
00:49:16 that's a much more interesting story
00:49:18 than saying well, you know,
00:49:22 sometimes the mass
00:49:25 sometimes it goes down by 20%
00:49:27 but eventually it comes back.
00:49:29 You know, which would
00:49:32 I mean, that's what is about.
00:49:35 To the untrained eye computer
00:49:39 and they give often wild
00:49:42 the appearance of rigoruous science.
00:49:45 They also provide an endless...
00:49:47 source of spectacular
00:49:49 The thing that has amazed me
00:49:53 is how the most elementary
00:49:57 seem to have been
00:50:01 In fact, the theory of
00:50:03 has spawned an entirely
00:50:07 We've got a whole new generation of reporters,
00:50:10 environmental journalists;
00:50:12 now, if you are an
00:50:16 and if the global warming
00:50:21 so does your job.
00:50:23 It really is that crude,
00:50:26 and their reporting has to
00:50:30 because there are still,
00:50:33 a few hardened news
00:50:37 "This is what you were
00:50:40 "Oh, but now is much
00:50:42 they are going to be
00:50:44 by next tuesday or something..."
00:50:47 They have to keep on getting shriller...
00:50:50 and shriller and shriller.
00:50:53 It is now common in the media
00:50:55 to lay the blame for every storm
00:50:57 or hurricane on global warming,
00:50:59 but is there any scientific basis for this?
00:51:02 This is purely propaganda.
00:51:05 Every textbook in
00:51:09 the main source of
00:51:13 is the temperature difference
00:51:15 between the tropics and the pole,
00:51:17 and we are told in a warmer world
00:51:20 this difference will get less.
00:51:22 Now that would tell you
00:51:24 you'll have less storminess
00:51:26 you'll have less variability
00:51:28 but for some reason that
00:51:31 so you tell the opposite.
00:51:33 News reports frequently argue
00:51:35 that even a mild increase
00:51:38 could lead to a catastrophic
00:51:42 but what does Earth's
00:51:45 We happen to have temperature
00:51:47 records of Greenland...
00:51:48 that go back thousands of years.
00:51:51 Greenland has been much warmer.
00:51:53 Just a thousand years ago
00:51:55 Greenland was warmer than it is today.
00:51:57 Yet it didn't have a
00:52:01 Even if we talk about
00:52:04 a great deal of the permafrost
00:52:06 (that icy layer under the
00:52:09 seven or eight
00:52:11 melted far more than we're having
00:52:13 any evidence about it melting now.
00:52:15 So in other words...
00:52:16 this is a historical pattern again
00:52:18 but the world didn't come
00:52:23 Professor Syun-Ichi Akasofu
00:52:25 is head of the International
00:52:28 in Alaska.
00:52:29 The IARC is the world's leading
00:52:34 Professor Akasofu
00:52:36 the ice caps are always
00:52:38 naturally expanding and contracting.
00:52:41 There are reports
00:52:44 of big chunks of ice break
00:52:46 away from Antarctic continent.
00:52:50 Those mass have been
00:52:54 but because now we have a satellite
00:52:58 they can detect those.
00:53:00 That's why they become news.
00:53:04 These data, from NASA's
00:53:07 shows the huge
00:53:09 and contraction
00:53:11 taken place in the 1990's.
00:53:13 I'd say all the TV programs
00:53:16 that debate to global warming
00:53:18 so big chunks of ice falling
00:53:21 from the edge of the glaciers
00:53:23 well people forget that
00:53:29 News reports frequently
00:53:31 of ice breaking from
00:53:33 what they don't say is that...
00:53:35 this is as ordinary event in the Arctic
00:53:37 as falling leaves on
00:53:40 They ask me, they just see ice falling
00:53:44 from the edge of the greatest:
00:53:46 yes, that's spring breakup
00:53:51 Press come to us towards
00:53:54 "you want to say something...
00:53:56 ...about the greenhouse disaster?",
00:53:59 and I say: "there is none".
00:54:02 Alarming television programs
00:54:04 raised the fear for prospect
00:54:06 a vast tidal waves flooding Britain.
00:54:08 But what causes the sea
00:54:10 ...and how fast does it happen?
00:54:13 Sea level changes over
00:54:16 are governed fundamentally
00:54:19 what we would call
00:54:21 the relationship of
00:54:22 which often by the way is
00:54:23 to do with the land rising or falling
00:54:25 and anything to do with the sea,
00:54:27 but if you're talking about
00:54:28 what we call eustatic changes of sea,
00:54:31 worldwide changes of sea,
00:54:33 that's through the thermal
00:54:37 nothing to do with melting ice.
00:54:38 And that's an enormously slow,
00:54:40 a long process.
00:54:44 People say: "Oh, I see the ocean...
00:54:46 doing this last year...
00:54:48 that means that something changed
00:54:51 in the atmosphere last year",
00:54:53 and this is not
00:54:55 in fact this is actually
00:54:57 because it can take hundreds
00:55:00 for the deep ocean to
00:55:04 and changes
00:55:05 hat are taking place
00:55:08 It is also suggested that
00:55:10 even a mild rise in temperature
00:55:12 will lead to the spread northward
00:55:14 of deadly insect-born tropical
00:55:18 But is this true?
00:55:21 Professor Paul Reiter
00:55:22 of the Pasteur Institute in Paris
00:55:24 is recognized as one of the world's
00:55:26 leading experts on malaria
00:55:28 and other insect-born diseases.
00:55:30 He is a member of the
00:55:32 expert advisory committee...
00:55:34 was chairman of the...
00:55:35 American Committee
00:55:37 of the American Society
00:55:39 and lead author on
00:55:41 of the US National
00:55:43 of the potential consequences
00:55:48 As Professor Reiter
00:55:50 mosquitoes thrive in
00:55:55 Mosquitoes are not
00:55:58 Most people would
00:55:59 in temper regions there
00:56:02 in fact, mosquitoes are
00:56:04 extremely abundant
00:56:07 The most devastating
00:56:10 was in the Soviet
00:56:13 there was something like
00:56:16 and something like
00:56:19 a tremendous
00:56:21 that raised up to
00:56:23 Archangel had
00:56:26 and about 10 thousand deaths.
00:56:28 So it's not a
00:56:30 Yet these people in the
00:56:34 invent the idea that...
00:56:36 malaria will move northward.
00:56:38 Climate scare stories cannot be blamed
00:56:41 solely on sloppy or
00:56:43 According to Professor Reiter,
00:56:45 hysterical alarms have
00:56:47 by the reports of the UN's IPCC.
00:56:53 On spread of malaria,
00:56:54 the IPCC warns us that:
00:56:56 "Mosquito species that
00:56:58 do not usually survive...
00:56:59 where the mean
00:57:01 drops below 16-18ºC".
00:57:05 According to Professor Reiter
00:57:06 this is clearly untrue.
00:57:08 I was horrified to read the second
00:57:10 and the third assessment reports
00:57:12 because there was
00:57:15 without any kind of records
00:57:18 or virtually without mention
00:57:22 the trully scientific literature,
00:57:24 literature by specialists
00:57:27 In a letter to the
00:57:29 Professor Frederick Seitz,
00:57:31 America's National
00:57:34 revealed that IPCC officials
00:57:36 had censored the
00:57:39 He said that:
00:57:40 "This report is not
00:57:42 that was approved by
00:57:45 At least 15 key sections
00:57:48 ...had been deleted.
00:57:49 These included statements like:
00:57:51 "None of the studies cited
00:57:54 ...that we can attribute
00:57:56 ...to increases in
00:57:58 "No study to date has
00:58:01 ...all or part
00:58:03 climate changes to
00:58:05 Professor Seitz concluded:
00:58:07 "I have never witnessed
00:58:11 of the peer-review process
00:58:13 than the events that
00:58:17 In its reply, the IPCC...
00:58:18 did not deny making
00:58:21 but it said that there
00:58:23 or bias in the report,
00:58:24 and that uncertainties about...
00:58:25 ...the cause of global warming
00:58:28 The changes have been made,
00:58:30 it said, in response
00:58:32 ...from governments,
00:58:34 and non-governmental
00:58:36 When I resigned from the IPCC
00:58:39 I thought this was the end of it;
00:58:41 but when I saw the final draft,
00:58:43 my name was still there.
00:58:45 I asked for it to be removed:
00:58:47 Well, they told me,
00:58:48 that I had contributed
00:58:51 So I said: "No, I haven't contributed
00:58:53 because they haven't
00:58:55 So in the end it was
00:58:57 but finally I threatened
00:59:00 and they removed my name,
00:59:01 and I think this happens
00:59:03 those people who are specialists
00:59:05 but don't agree
00:59:08 and resigned...
00:59:09 (and there have been
00:59:12 they are simply put
00:59:14 and become part of these...
00:59:15 2,500 of the world's
00:59:19 Research relating to
00:59:21 is now one of the best
00:59:24 The US government alone spends...
00:59:25 ...for than 4 billion dollars a year.
00:59:28 According to NASA
00:59:30 scientists who speak out...
00:59:31 ...against man-made global warming
00:59:33 have a lot to lose.
00:59:35 It's generally harder to get
00:59:38 because of the stands
00:59:41 and you'll find very few of us
00:59:42 that are willing to take public stand
00:59:44 because it does cut
00:59:48 It is a common prejudice
00:59:49 that scientists
00:59:51 with the theory of man-made
00:59:53 must have been paid by
00:59:57 I get it all the time:
00:59:58 "You must be in the pay
01:00:01 Sadly, like most of the
01:00:04 I haven't see a penny
01:00:06 I'm always accused of being paid
01:00:07 by oil and gas companies.
01:00:08 I've never received a nickel
01:00:09 from the oil and gas companies.
01:00:11 I joke about I wished
01:00:13 then I could afford
01:00:15 Whenever anybody says that...
01:00:16 I'm in the pay of an oil company,
01:00:19 I say my bank manager
01:00:24 There's almost no private sector
01:00:27 and yet, to be involved
01:00:30 which involves an industry grant,
01:00:32 no matter how small,
01:00:33 and spell ruin to a
01:00:36 Modern technology fuelled
01:00:40 Patrick Michaels is Professor
01:00:43 at the University of Virginia.
01:00:45 He was chair of the committee
01:00:47 at the American Meteorological Society,
01:00:50 president of the American Association
01:00:51 of State Climatologists,
01:00:52 the author of three books on Meteorology,
01:00:54 ...and an author and reviewer
01:01:01 But when he conducted research
01:01:02 which was part funded
01:01:05 he found himself among those
01:01:06 under attack from
01:01:12 "British based corporations...
01:01:14 are some of the worst climate
01:01:18 Shell is based in the UK,
01:01:22 and we have the right and the duty
01:01:24 to take it back into public ownership,
01:01:26 and send its managers
01:01:26 and send its managers
01:01:31 But reasoned debate...
01:01:33 is not the only casualty in
01:01:36 As international public
01:01:39 on industrial emissions of CO2,
01:01:41 the developing world is coming
01:01:43 under intense pressure
01:01:50 "I'm not expert on climate change,
01:01:52 I'm not scientist,
01:01:53 what I'm gonna say next
01:01:56 is just that: turn it off!
01:02:00 Anything you don't need,
01:02:03 it's easier than you think
01:02:12 Delegates from
01:02:13 are flying into Nairobi
01:02:14 for a conference
01:02:17 to talk about global warming.
01:02:21 Civil servants,
01:02:22 professional NGO campaigners,
01:02:24 carbon offset funder managers,
01:02:26 environmental journalists and others,
01:02:28 will discuss every aspect
01:02:32 from how to promote
01:02:34 to the relationship between
01:02:38 The conference lasts ten days;
01:02:40 the number of delegates
01:02:44 The billions of dollars
01:02:46 means there's a
01:02:48 of people dependent
01:02:50 and they will want to
01:02:53 happens in any burocracy.
01:02:55 Where I live we have local council,
01:02:59 a local council global warming officer.
01:03:03 There's a huge tail out there of people
01:03:09 who have in one way
01:03:12 been recruited to join this
01:03:16 Anybody who then
01:03:19 "hey, wait a minute,
01:03:21 and rationally and carefully,
01:03:23 and see actually how much merit,
01:03:25 how much this stands up,
01:03:27 they will be ostracized.
01:03:30 Scientists, accustomed to the relatively civility
01:03:33 and obscurity of academic life,
01:03:35 suddenly find themselves
01:03:37 if they dare to challenge
01:03:39 ...man-made global warming,
01:03:41 ...vilified by campaign groups
01:03:43 and even within
01:03:45 there's an old English saying:
01:03:47 "if you stand up in the coconut-shy,
01:03:49 they're gonna throw at you".
01:03:50 So I understand there's
01:03:53 but it gets pretty difficult
01:03:54 and pretty nasty and very personal.
01:03:57 And I've been death threats
01:04:01 so I'm not doing it for my health.
01:04:04 These days, if you are skeptical
01:04:06 about the Litany around
01:04:09 you are suddlely like as if
01:04:15 The environmental movement really
01:04:16 it is a political activist movement
01:04:19 and they have become hugely
01:04:27 And every politician
01:04:30 Whether you are in the left,
01:04:31 in the middle or the right,
01:04:32 you have to pay homage
01:04:37 In the past moth,
01:04:38 the global warming campaign
01:04:39 has won a great victory:
01:04:40 the United States government,
01:04:42 once a bastion of resistance,
01:04:44 has succumbed.
01:04:45 George Bush is now an allied.
01:04:48 Western governments have now
01:04:50 embraced the need for
01:04:52 to restrain industrial production
01:04:54 in the developed and developing world.
01:04:57 But is it what cost?
01:04:59 Paul Driessen is a former
01:05:02 My big concern with
01:05:05 is that the policies
01:05:08 to supposedly prevent
01:05:11 are having a disastrous effect
01:05:14 ...on the world's poorest people.
01:05:16 Global warming campaigners say
01:05:18 it does not harm to be on the safe side;
01:05:20 even if the theory of man-made
01:05:22 climate change is wrong,
01:05:23 we should impose draconian measures
01:05:25 to cut carbon emissions, just in case.
01:05:29 They call this the
01:05:32 The precautionary principles
01:05:35 It's basically used to promote
01:05:37 a particular agenda in ideology,
01:05:39 it's always used in one direction only.
01:05:42 It talks about the risks of
01:05:46 fossil fuels for example,
01:05:48 but never about the
01:05:51 It never talks about the benefits
01:05:53 of having that technology.
01:05:57 Anne Mougela is about to cook...
01:05:59 ...a meal for her children.
01:06:01 She is one of the 2 billion people,
01:06:03 a third of the world's population,
01:06:05 who have no access to electricity.
01:06:07 Instead, they must burn wood
01:06:09 or dried animal dung in their homes.
01:06:12 The indoor smoke this creates
01:06:14 is the deadliest form of
01:06:17 According to the World
01:06:19 four million children
01:06:21 die each year from
01:06:24 caused by indoor smoke,
01:06:26 and many millions of
01:06:28 from cancer and lung disease
01:06:31 If you ask a rural person
01:06:35 they'll tell you:
01:06:36 "yes I'll know I move
01:06:39 when I have electricity".
01:06:41 Actually not having electricity
01:06:42 creates such a long
01:06:45 cause the first thing
01:06:47 So you have to go to sleep earlier
01:06:50 because there's no light,
01:06:52 there's no reason to
01:06:54 you can't talk to each
01:06:57 No refrigeration or
01:06:59 means food cannot
01:07:01 Fire in the hut is too smoky
01:07:03 and consumes too much
01:07:07 There is no hot water.
01:07:09 We in the West cannot
01:07:11 how hard life is
01:07:14 The life expectancy of people...
01:07:15 who live like this in
01:07:18 Their existance impoverished
01:07:24 A few miles away the UN
01:07:25 is hosting its conference
01:07:28 in its plush gated headquarters.
01:07:32 Gift shop is selling souvenirs
01:07:34 while delegates discuss...
01:07:36 how to promote what
01:07:38 "sustainable forms of
01:07:42 Africa has coal,
01:07:46 but environmental groups
01:07:48 against the use of these
01:07:52 Instead, they say Africa...
01:07:54 and the rest of the
01:07:56 ...should use solar
01:08:02 A short drive out of Nairobi
01:08:04 we find our first solar panel.
01:08:08 A Kenian public health official
01:08:10 has brought us to a clinic
01:08:11 which serves several villages.
01:08:14 The only electrical
01:08:16 in the clinic are
01:08:18 and a refrigerator in which
01:08:20 medicine and blood samples.
01:08:23 Electricity is provided
01:08:27 - So what can you to do successfully?
01:08:32 What happens when you put
01:08:36 Tell us, what happens?
01:08:38 - It sounds an alarm?
01:08:42 - Can we maybe see that?
01:08:52 The solar panels allow Dr. Samuel Morangui
01:08:55 to use either the lights
01:08:58 but not both at
01:09:00 If he does, the
01:09:04 Wind and solar power
01:09:07 as a source of electricity,
01:09:08 and are at least three
01:09:11 than conventional forms
01:09:15 The question would be
01:09:18 how many people in the United States
01:09:20 are already using
01:09:23 and how cheap is it, you see,
01:09:25 if it's expensive for the Europeans,
01:09:28 if it's expensive for the Americans,
01:09:30 and we are talking
01:09:32 you know, it doesn't make sense.
01:09:35 The rich countries
01:09:37 to engage in some
01:09:38 experimentation with
01:09:41 but for us we are still
01:09:46 To former environmentalist
01:09:48 the idea that the world's
01:09:51 should be restricted
01:09:53 most expensive and inefficient
01:09:57 is the most morally
01:10:00 of the global warming campaign.
01:10:03 Let me make one
01:10:06 if we are telling the Third World
01:10:08 that they can only have
01:10:11 what we are really telling them is:
01:10:14 "You cannot have electricity".
01:10:18 The challenge we have,
01:10:19 when we meet western
01:10:22 who say we must engage
01:10:24 in the use of solar panels
01:10:28 is how we can have
01:10:32 because I don't see how a solar panel
01:10:35 is going to power a steel industry,
01:10:38 how a solar panel, you know,
01:10:40 is going to power maybe
01:10:46 It might work maybe to
01:10:52 I think one of the most pernicious aspects
01:10:54 of the modern environmental movement
01:10:56 is the romantization of peasant life,
01:11:00 and the idea that industrial societies
01:11:03 are the destroyers of the world.
01:11:08 One clear thing that emerges
01:11:10 from the old environmental debate
01:11:12 is the point that there's somebody
01:11:15 keen to kill the African dream,
01:11:18 and the African dream is to develop.
01:11:20 The environmental movement
01:11:22 has evolved into the
01:11:25 for preventing development
01:11:29 We have been told
01:11:31 don't touch your oil,
01:11:32 don't touch your coal,
01:11:34 that is suicide.
01:11:36 I think it's legitimate for me
01:11:39 like OK, you don't have to think
01:11:41 humans are better than whales,
01:11:45 or better than owls,
01:11:47 or whatever if you don't
01:11:50 But surely it is not a good idea
01:11:54 to think of humans as sort of being scum,
01:11:56 you know, that is OK to have
01:11:59 going blind or dead or whatever,
01:12:01 I just can't relate to that.
01:12:04 The theory of man-made
01:12:06 is now so firmly entrenched,
01:12:08 the voices of opposition
01:12:11 it seems invincible,
01:12:13 untroubled by any
01:12:16 no matter how strong.
01:12:18 The global warming alarm
01:12:23 There will be still people
01:12:25 who believe that this is
01:12:28 particularly when you
01:12:31 the chief scientist
01:12:34 telling people that by
01:12:36 the only habitable
01:12:39 will be the Antarctic.
01:12:41 And it may, humanity
01:12:44 thanks to some
01:12:46 who moved to
01:12:48 I mean this is hilarious.
01:12:51 It would be hilarious
01:12:58 TRANSCRIPTION: Geekette and Eduard
01:13:07 Downloaded From www.moviesubtitles.org