continue. to. follow and welcome to cross talk i'm curious about sweating it out a good part of the world is experiencing a crippling heat wave is this a trend or simply freaky weather one thing is certain extreme temperatures are again fuelling the debate on climate change. you can. discuss what's happening to the weather i'm joined by mark linus and oxford he's an environmentalist and climate change author in new york we have alexander ox director of world watches institute climate and energy program and in los angeles we crossed a fellow mcaleer he's a journalist and documentary filmmaker and another member of our cross talk team

all right gentlemen cross talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want mark and i to go to you in oxford first what hell is going on with the weather and i say that with a great deal of passion because moscow is baking this is russia it shouldn't be happening here at least that's what i always believed why are we having such high temperatures around the world in places which you would never expect it. well first up you've got to distinguish between weather and climate ok if we're going to look at whether we're experiencing climate change and global warming you need to bear that in mind that climate is the average of weather over a longer period so with the heat waves that we're seeing these are reflective of a broader trend towards warming so i think you can say that we're now seeing the first effects of global warming in the way that these heat waves are now coming more often and they're hitting more severely and hitting harder in the places where the teller against local cooling already i was i. mean really i didn't think what

happens i'm sorry go ahead go ahead let him go ahead go ahead well yeah you can talk about you can't them are according to mark linus you can't talk about individual weather events when it's cold weather when there's cold weather no that's got nothing to do with the cloud but that's got nothing or that's just a one off event then when it gets hot which it does somewhere in the world every so often then that's indicative of climate change they that's the thing with these climate alarmists they change the rules to suit their own argument they change the facts to suit their own argument and the people are software are working people who depend upon cheap energy for their jobs it was usually not lazy going to the basic research the slightest using point of. using your human intelligence and your computer are saying this doesn't care about the purse people of the planet. all right now i can get you to shout out to the right of us close here when it was cold in america well it was cold in america you know when i made a big point i was told tired one time again this is cold weather this is not

climate no i want to warm you want to say all this is climate and we need to do we need to cut diet industry we need to cut the hopes of millions of people in the developing world take away their or their hold of our fossil future and in industrial future condemn millions hundreds of millions of people in the developing world to a pre-industrial. existence which means. increasing child mortality and short british don't you made your point mark wants to reply and we want to go ahead mark go ahead and jump in. well it which it was just to make the point actually that we're talking about averaging out weather here so rather than looking at different events and saying believes reflects something or they don't you have to look at longer term changes and there's less and less cold events when there's more and more hot events and that shows that the baseline is changing and the reason for this is basic physics i mean climate deniers like problem over there may and may try and go against the rules of physics but the rest would have to live by them and the fact is that if you put more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere

principally carbon dioxide the system the earth system the climate will heat up there's no way you can deny that it's provable in a bar or a tree the question is how much it'll heat up and by and by and by when and that's where the scientific uncertainties are but we're running a huge risk with our children's future and with our own future if we continue to dump these pollutants into the atmosphere as if there were no tomorrow and then listen to deniers like trying to pretend it's not exist not happening presumably in order to benefit powerful industrial interests like you will come out all right i want to hear alexander first because we haven't heard all you know all xander in new york please go ahead thank you very much i guess at this point i want to make two comments here one is we bring together the scientists the leading scientists in the world those who have peer reviewed journal articles in a very open and very transparent process in which governments also have some sort of an oversight in the say in it since many years starting in one thousand nine hundred two and that's of course the u.n.

panel called the international panel on climate change thousands of the real scientists and not the allam is on either side maybe and these these scientists come to very clear reports and they report in two thousand and seven the most recent one states that the influence of human beings on the climate is without any doubt and it also just you know it's basically it's not just physical sciences and we can go back and it's recorded that the warming in the last century was warming of zero. point seven four degree celsius so so this is one point i want to make i really want to move forward and talk about solutions rather than doubting the science i think the science is clear that as well as i actually like i don't like to change. things yeah i mean i said you know what we agree is a low. point nine percent of climate scientists are going to do with their hundred percent in saying i want to just let me general managers and that if there's

anything i demand in the senate. now xander finishes point i know this is a contentious issue go ahead you can finish if you're from that is the second here's the second point so one is about the observer luzhin today and the second and there is there's going to be a war in the future and this is clear beyond any doubt in my point of view the second thing that i wanted to make is what is this great fossil fuel future that you're lining out here i mean i think you basically want to lock in people with you know all the usual kinds of lifes on a daily basis local pollution local water pollution you want to maybe lock them in with a diesel generator the fuel of which they can't afford in five or ten years anymore yeah i mean beautiful a solution is useful these are. and in the in the in the really in the really very literal sense of the ok gentlemen looks like we've got two sides here in los angeles you want to reply to that it's not it's not my solution it's the solution that is me and marc rich it is the solution that is made alex rich it's

a solution that means i can live in a rich society with all the benefits that brings it's a fossil fuel solution that marc and alex want to deny to the poorest people on the planet and alex talks about the i.p.c.c. saying it has warmed up in these public documents but i prefer i prefer when scientists talk privately like in the claimant get emails and member that scientists who say that the truth is a house and warm the last fifteen years and it's a disgrace that we can't explain why we've gone through create this feud is warm you know weather changes. it always will it always has warmer weather is good for agricultural productivity at least a male she's e-mails have just been misinterpreted cost of millions of jobs will cost hundreds of millions of jobs across the across america across europe across russia and then deny the chance of a future to hundreds of millions in the developing world you want to make some ridiculous conspiracy theories and i built a distance i thought ok mark go ahead jump in there go ahead mark what i just say i

just want to say that let's let martin let's let me jump in. yeah this whole climate gate business i mean it does add fuel to the conspiracy theory fires that you hear from the climate change denial side but the fact is that if anyone's private emails with scott's all over the internet it will be embarrassing there are things that were said in private which i don't think showed climate science in the greatest light but the fact is it doesn't change any of the basics of what we understand about the way the climate works in the way we understand about the effects of greenhouse gases and you can pretend the risks don't exist you can pretend that they're always going to stay the same you can pretend that burning fossil fuel has no interest has no effect rather but as i say that's just sticking your head in the sand if you've got that knowledge marquees like if you think you've got or do you really just finish up let me finish up if you think you've got to intentionally as a great you go do you go down the road and see somebody who's who's not an expert and ask their opinion or you go to an oncologist if you've got a heart problem you go to a you know a cardio cardiologist don't you so you need to listen to the experts here in the experts ninety eight ninety nine percent i did that we have a problem and we've got to start dealing with it ok alexander i'd like to go to you

that's going to have i don't know the exact overly strict guidelines but the goal is only xander please ok we just heard that there's a lot of consensus within the scientific community and i'm going to take mark's word for that ok but one of the problems i have is a bystander i'm not an expert on any of this ok i did really badly in science in high school but what is happening to the message about climate change because we keep we're told over and over and over again the scientists disagree we have these emails floating around i mean alexander his the whole message about climate change been modeled in the media partly responsible for that because of really blown it out of proportion sometimes. i you know you are you're actually hitting hitting a really good point here and it is that the media is playing its role and i don't think it's purpose you know on purpose reporting about anything wrong here but it

always has a tendency to show both sides in this case the problem is just as mark has has said that eighteen ninety eight percent ninety nine percent of the scientists maybe even more actually do agree on the basic facts they do agree that the work that the temperature has warmed on an average scale over the last one hundred years and it's actually not true at all that it has coal cooled down in the last fifteen years it has actually what the last fifteen years on average are the hottest on record that we have experienced so the so we. agree on that the thing is for the media you want to have somebody who who shows the other side so that makes these five or ten people that are out there that are actually still still the nine it may be a few more maybe of the dozen i don't really care too much about them but that makes them very prominent and they have hardly any reason to give up the world that they are playing quite frankly of yes the telemann los angeles i think one minute

before we go to the break is it really that much consensus in the scientific community from your perspective well i'm lucky enough to be old enough when i went to school in the seventy's to be told by my geography teacher we're renting we're entering a new i see it double to consensus back them so mean scientific insanity not true so you know in other areas you can either because. no no sorry i was taught in school that's not a myth i was told at school that we were and what you enjoy is reassuring i'm not sure but i know that i'm fine i feel if you know that if you let myself get after it if you look at my documentary if you look at my documentary not evil just for all we even go back and show all the newspapers show the callings from time magazine then use scientific advances are was not it was known as i saw him said it was and all it was in the irish times the new york times it was a consensus no scientist was saying they were wrong the cia reports though that american state department reports same rancher in a new era. of ice age all right gentlemen i'm going to jump in right here why all

right gentlemen gentlemen ok we have to go to a break after a short break we'll continue our debate on climate change stay with our team. and. the state has provided citizens with. kites and school boards to sell to put. up some cash. like. when the government shuts tank. in my class. right here.

i'll be killing hundreds. see. the lead in to. talk i'm peter lavelle tree mind you we're talking about extreme weather around the world. lead. singer of the sled. but first let's see if russians believe in global warming.

some of plugging heating quaking what's next all over the world people experiencing extreme weather unusual for their region for the season and in general precedent russia is experiencing the hottest summer in over fifty years coming on the heels of a alone and very cold winter the high temperatures have seen forest fires raids and droughts athletic rushes crop yield but has the normal heatwave convinced russian change skeptics according to a recent public opinion poll almost half of russians forty nine percent now accept the principle of global warming thirty three percent remain unconvinced however deny global warming is with us peter are a gentleman we're talking about differences within maybe the scientific community

maybe there is. a large majority in a small minority but at the end of the day it's kind of turned into the climate industry because a lot of people write about it people make films about it there are scientists involved non scientists involved there are people who go it both extremes if i go to you alexander the climate industry in a way everyone arguing everyone is kind of benefitting in their own private way but does it really help us understand where we should be going well i mean there's clearly a lot of people out there that are not. profiting from from just talking and not acting and you know there's a very clear economic case apart from an energy security case a military security case and environmentalists there's a clear economic case to make to really act on it and every day actually not acting we're losing we're losing economically we're losing people's lives the science has so greatly progress over the last say years and i'm a very surprised to see the gentleman from from los angeles talking about what

scientists thought in one thousand. i mean we that was probably around the time still when we thought that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer and we had a time where very powerful people in on this planet actually doubted that the earth is a ball and it's not drowned it's actually flat so we're having these these i think we have to overcome this last stage it is really in our interest in our and economic interest to act and not just not just talk about it of course it's an issue that touches people very personally and you know again the gentleman from los angeles talking before about our rich life in the cities you know we hardly feel these heat waves yes it's hot outside but you know we really experience climate actually really rather as the weather it's our tomorrow. it's raining that's bringing umbrella to work that's the kind of way we experience it but if you go outside of the cities if you talk to the farmers worldwide if you talk to the people who live closer to nature they going to tell you these stories is happening

right now and actually over the last ten years and i'm really frank and honest about this i had a lot of climate deniers in my group of friends people you know who didn't believe too much into it and a lot of them have changed because they see the grass getting yellow in the summer in places like vancouver where that has and they are marching out before and nobody remembered that this happened so they see it firsthand and i think skews i mean excuse me gentlemen as it touches people and years and years in the newer you know the good gentleman in los angeles is making funny about it and that's his right and it's interesting because you sound like he's even going to do not listen to. you not listen did you not listen to the did you not listen to the previous report it's the warmest summer in moscow for fifty years and you know that's a very important part think fifty years ago it was warmer. so what happened fifty years ago. that's pretty this huge expansion of industrial activity

pre-development. doings i mean does this so this really. was. the one if the coldest summers on record in los angeles where where where and where one of the coldest summers in los angeles on record. it's i haven't seen this so this is a classic that is it was really sick to say you know you know sixty six degrees all of a serious injury is i mean just six degrees colder than normal you know it was a statistic yesterday that washington is harder than spain for one hundred thirty years one hundred thirty years ago it was harder so what caused that it was and it wasn't global warming it's called whether it's a big planet there will be extreme weather all over it and i will be clear you probably still trying to channel. that was. calming down to only. let's listen well i would say one of the issues is one of the issues

is god is why back to the climate gate emails ok let's let's but one of the things that people say go back to the climate these days constantly the flying if i get more i learn that when there's hartwell or if they push it up mark if i could ask you how do this how does the scientific community get around the argument that we just heard that ok it was hard fifty years ago it was cold twenty five years ago i mean it's incumbent upon folks like yourself to kind of convince people like our guest in los angeles why that is the case it's because intuitively you say he's right because it was a few years ago no more i want marquee names or go ahead go ahead yeah no i completely agree with you and the problem is you do need to have some basic understanding of statistics to see the difference here if it was you know it was a hot summer every hundred years through the last thousand yes it's been hot before and it wasn't global warming that caused it but it's now hot if we now get the same kind of heat waves every five years or every ten years or or every two years perhaps becoming more frequently and so that reflects

a change in the average which reflects the fact the earth is heating up now you don't you don't have to be a total mathematician but you have to some basic knowledge and i don't think the gentleman in los angeles either understands it or wants to understand it because his goal here is to confuse the public by denying the simple physical reality of why warming that's right attributed by to. motives to someone you disagree with markets a great attitude attribute b.s. motives to someone you disagree with me are you interested in science are you interested in debate or are you just interested in trolling b.s. insults say i'm not interested calling me a denier linking me to the denial of the holocaust all those basically want to help you listen to the issues we do know that is just reason and it's just not just in the measurability doesn't matter. this is one world phil jones from climate gets i've used mike's trick to hide the trying hide to the clay those are very significant words what. do you know what you're doing shadow so mary maybe you use mike's trick that i do you understand what that email was talking about typing that

i tell you what you're talking about hiding in the train on time but your phone. line and temperature of the tell me tell me when you're from sound so i'll get the last question i guess they could actually stick. right so tell me come on tell me the difference explain to me what was missing in the context context context this is the muslim association i mean this is done for you for me to be a small of so much to my. journalistic inquiry my journalistic inquiry see what i mean to you the question being funded by oil companies if it is the a b a small us . yes my god man said there's been an increase in temperature in the last hundred years did that in the nature article phil jones says i've used makes trick to hide the decline so there's actually been declining temperatures recently and they've used a trick to hide it so. let's pretend it's hard all over the world to know that this was really entertainment for serious crimes and you actually want to quote the climate game if you actually want to understand what it was a time when you name just one of us is

a literature. we can't explain it and that's a discrete this. mean i should probably just quote from it so you're not going to not get involved conversation because they're for their wonderful source their wonderful source of information about the tricks and the deceptions that these climate alarmists to use you know you to prove anything you're going to was coming to me and that's what i was this was like being here in the us i was just been here a little bit. bothers me so much people know i'm sorry let me jump in here with really bothers me and i'm not pointing any fingers on this program here but there is a lot of finger pointing at each other and i still it really befuddles me i mean if we really care about the planet why can't we find some kind of consensus why do we have this kind of arguing when we know i mean if it isn't global warming how do we just deal with climate change ok that's kind of a compromise here because it sounds like they're getting my pointing fingers on

this program but each side of this debate says the other one has altering or motives that are very very bad alexander you to address that because it seems like the discourse is just fraying and we're not getting anywhere. well i mean you know . let me let me disclose something here i am not an atmospheric scientist i am not an atmospheric scientist that is an international panel it's the who is who of international atmosphere scientists ocean ocean scientist natural scientists and international panel it's the who is who of who has something to say ok and they come to very clear reports and i just want people who watch this program to look at these reports as very good summaries easy to understand summaries those are not all amiss though this is mainstream science ok number one and number two. in the last fifteen years there hasn't been one single let me read people's one single article

out there that that made it past by a peer review board that's actually doubting two things either that it's the temperature is warming and that this is recorded and secondly the human cost greenhouse gases are the main culprit for this that's not going on and article i explained i was right to know about you is like i mean like like me like not so actual scientists but a filmmaker in the los angeles things that he can change the psychosis selig's i don't want to call you a liar so the question should really go to me it's like i was only known in law you're a liar so i have to assume that you are your mistress. and i have to assume that the dude just misinformed richard let you see they had a saying because for example from mit yet richard richard lindzen has published many many many papers challenging that actually on science if you just call richard lindzen he's the head of the rich you know this is the it's about donna richard

lindzen he's the head of atmospheric sami's one you can instead of iraq was very exciting as a thing to do with my shoes institute of technology he's the one that has the want to solidify although i think it's sad to me to know you said alexander stille science said there was no sign. and i will say i did our studies and it was in the end as i want you to listen i'm not going to trial if i go through a list of the scientific papers if you like but alexander was i just quoted you know i'll write your own letters to just run out of time saying hey she lives are a very very lively articulate way thanks to my guests today in oxford new york and los angeles and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at r.t. see you next time and remember cross talk rules. and.

hungry for the full story we've got it for. the biggest issues get a human voice ceased to face with the news makers on the.

every month we give you the future to understand how we'll get there and what

tomorrow brings the best in science and technology from across russia and around the world to join its knowledge on r g. o c's top stories this hour russia's probe into the sinking of a south korean warship and lunch counters an early u.s. that investigation of blames the communist north. president obama signs all fifty nine billion dollars more for the latest troop surge in afghanistan while campaigning is in the u.s. predicts the beginning of the end for the war. also thousands of barrels of dangerous chemicals could reach the russian border within days after being washed into a river but not in the northeastern china. i'm the governor of the u.s.

state of arizona is set to be against a federal court's ruling that looks possibly new immigration or a section of the controversial bill gave police the right to question suspects about that immigration status. the headlines up next aids the i don't know show from washington with the use of marty want to for medical purposes just been permitted in the u.s. capital and you want to his from both sides of the legislation debate. my. welcome to the alona show we'll get the real headlines and out of the mersey we're coming live out of washington d.c. and today or two days ago it happened washington d.c. home of taipei bureaucrats and of course barack obama will they legalize the use of medical marijuana so there's this new law reflect changing attitudes on drugs in the united states and.