Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]  RT  July 30, 2010 3:31am-4:01am EDT

3:31 am
crosstalk 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 ochs director of world watches institute climate and energy program and in los angeles we crossed a phelim 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 the 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
3:32 am
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 they're telling we get a little cooling already and i was i. was going anywhere that i didn't think would happen so i'm sorry go ahead go ahead let him go ahead go ahead well yeah you can talk about the count de mar 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
3:33 am
nothing to do with the climate 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 the lazy going to the basic research the slightest using point of mass to you. using your human intelligence and your computer are saying this doesn't care about the poorest people on the planet. all right now i can get you to shut up kind of. close here where 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 and i want to warm you want to say oh this is climate and we need to do we need to cut in an 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. future condemn hundreds of millions of people in the developing world to
3:34 am
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 and 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 may try and go against the rules of physics but the rest of us have to live by them and the fact is that if you put more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere principally carbon dioxide the system of the earth system the climate will heat up there's no way you can deny that it's provable in the burra tree the question is how much will heat up on 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
3:35 am
dump these pollutants into the atmosphere as if there were no tomorrow and then listen to deniers like famine who pretend it's not exist not happening presumably in order to benefit powerful industrial interests like royalty well all right i want to hear alexander first because we haven't heard i'm going to get all xander in new york please go ahead thank you very much well 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 and a say in it since many years starting in one thousand nine hundred two and that's of course a 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
3:36 am
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 degrees celsius 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 his lies i actually like i don't need any more . yeah i mean i was that you know we agree is illusion. point nine percent of climate scientists are going to do with their hundred percent and saying i want to just let me general manager and i design even if it was very very demanding and explain it i'm sitting here in atlanta mind you. finish this point i know this is a contentious issue go ahead you can finish if you pull that is the second is the second point so one is about the observer luzhin today and the second and there is
3:37 am
there's going to be a warning 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 us or you know all the usual cause of life's 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. 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 go ahead 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 purpose people on the planet alex talks about the i.p.c.c. say and it has warmed up in these public documents but i prefer i prefer when
3:38 am
scientists talk privately like in the claimant get emails and member that scientists who say that the truth is that house and warm the last fifteen years and it's a disgrace that we can't explain why we've gone through. this a few dia's it's warm you know weather changes. it always will it always has warmer weather is good for agricultural productivity that alex you know legal issues e-mails have just been misinterpreted cost millions of jobs will cost hundreds of millions of jobs across the across america across europe across russia and deny the chance of a future to hundreds of millions in the developing world i don't want to make that sort of ridiculous conspiracy theories and i will to this ordinary possible feels ok mark go ahead jump in there go ahead mark what i just say i just. was like martin let's go ahead 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
3:39 am
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 and the way we understand about the effects of greenhouse gases 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 now is mark you know if you think you've got more and you've also if you let me just finish up let me finish up if you think you've you've got more intentional have you as a great to go do you go down the road and see somebody who's who's not an expert and ask their opinion or do 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 when i do that we have a problem and we've got to start dealing with it ok alexander i'd like to go to you and i want to if i don't know the exact overly strict guidelines i go to 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
3:40 am
a bystander i'm not an expert on any of this ok i did really badly in science in high school but what has happened 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 muddled in the media partly responsible for that too 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 eighty 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
3:41 am
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 so we do 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 actually still study nine yet maybe 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 fight frankly guess that you know i'm in los angeles i did get 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 that we're renting we're entering
3:42 am
a new ice age doubles the consensus back them so scientific consensus to not truly say that another is a human idea because. no no sorry i was taught in school that's not a myth i was told at school that we were and when you enjoy this research i am not sure but i know that i find i feel 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 the new scientific advances are was going to be known as i said he said it was and all it was in the irish times the new york times it was a consensus and no scientist was saying they were wrong the cia reports the american state department reports say mandarin and you. knew a year of i.c. it's all right and gentlemen i'm going to have 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.
3:43 am
it's provided citizens with. rights and it's a tough sell to. us it. was like. when the government seems to think. like last. week. i'm going to be killing hundreds.
3:44 am
and you. see. in the lead in to. the lead. welcome back i'm peter lavelle tree mind you we're talking about extreme weather around the world. lead. to. say the sled but first let's see if russians believe in global warming. some of plugging heating in quake 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 you know
3:45 am
with fifty years coming on the heels of a loan and they're recalled went up 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
3:46 am
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 thirty years and i'm a very surprised to see the gentleman from from los angeles talking about what scientists are in one thousand seven hundred. 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
3:47 am
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 lives 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 daily whether it's our tomorrow. it's raining let's bring in 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 who didn't believe too much into it and a lot of them have changed because they see the ground as getting yellow in the summer in places like vancouver where that has and they were marching out before
3:48 am
and nobody remembered that this happened so they see that firsthand and i think i mean excuse me gentlemen as it touches people i know years and years in the revenue or you know the good gentleman in los angeles is making films about it and that's his right and it's interesting because you sound like he's even on economics did you not listen to. you not listen they did not listen to the they did or 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 a pre-industrial that's pre this huge expansion of industrial activity pre-development although most of us are industrious so this really. didn't want to have 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
3:49 am
this so this is a classic is he wants to say you know sixty six degrees all of a series of the green is meaningless it's six degrees colder than normal you know and it was a mistake 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 weather it's a big planet there will be extreme weather all over it and i would be clear trying to explain to you trying to. calm down to only say is equal. to the cloud all i would say one of the issues is one of the issues is god is why i like the climate get e-mails ok let's let's but one of the things that people say go back to the climate these days constantly that flying if i get more and more when the when they talk well they push it up mark if i could ask you how do this how does the scientific community get around the
3:50 am
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 say he's right because it was quite a few years ago no more i want more of these are 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 if 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 every two years perhaps they're coming 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 have 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
3:51 am
reality of my warming that's why i attribute bad. 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 b.s. insults say i'm not interested calling me a denier linking me to the denial of the holocaust all those b.s. really want to help you listen to the issues we do know that is around this reason and it's just those chills just in the measurability doesn't measure. the 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. you know what you are doing just fine i remember you use mike's trick the high degree i just about email was talking about typing in the line to 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 start to. question that you can stick to the how to stick. right so tell me come on tell me the difference explain to me what was missing in the context of context
3:52 am
context this is this in the minds of the so you know this is done i think you're trying to be a small of so much of my. journalistic inquiry my journalistic inquiry into you the question being funded by oil companies you because the a b a small us. yes michael mann said there's been an increase in temperature in the last hundred years aided 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 it was really entertaining 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 discreet this. i mean i should probably just quote from it so you know you said we're not get involved conversation because there are there are a wonderful source there wonderful source of information about the tricks and the deceptions that these climate alarmists to use you know you have to prove you know
3:53 am
what i'm going to do you know and this was this was like you know being here in the . last week just being here a little bit putting me out of work with 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 there are you know i get 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 for a. we're not getting anywhere. well i mean you know. let me let me disclose
3:54 am
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 scientist 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 a mainstream science of a number one and number two. in the last fifteen years there hasn't been one single . pete this 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 that human cost
3:55 am
greenhouse gases are the main culprit for this that's not going on and i'll explain i want right to know about the winds like i mean like like me like not so actual scientist but a filmmaker in that allows and other 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 miss. and i have to assume that the dude just misinformed richard lee 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 it richard lindzen he's the head of a written notice the crowd on a richard lindzen he's the head of atmospheric scientists one you can instead of iraq on the next as i think i have to do with my shoes is institute of technology he's the one that he's the one to solidify although i think it's sad to me to know you said alexander was no sign. yes alex said there was no science that i will submit to your socks and the lenses i want to do and i'm not going to trial i'll go
3:56 am
through a list of the scientific papers if you like but alexander was just quote i would take you know i generally to just anyone will 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 are to see you next time and remember cross talk rules. and.
3:57 am
3:58 am
much brighter than if you move from phones to french and.
3:59 am
start on t.v. dot com. wave of disaster thousands of barrels containing dangerous chemicals flow towards russia after being swept by floods into a chinese river. germany is torn between opposing human rights and protecting its citizens as preventive detention comes under ease use scrutiny. and a stake in the future of the russia close of serious business the fertile lands of coal over two hundred kilometers outside the capital to see its plans to meet every table in the land. and coming up in the business update we've been looking at the new role which bonds insider trading hey in russia and also news that we export
4:00 am
goods because of the drought which has hit the country's call with all the details in about twenty minutes time. this is r.t. live from moscow marina joshing welcome to the program adverts are on the way to recover hundreds of barrels of hazardous chemicals which are floating down a chinese river towards russia they were swept away in a recent flood moscow's concern about the possible consequences should the toxic material cross the border sarah ferguson is at the chinese embassy in moscow and she brings us the latest. the chinese media reporting that thousands of these barrels have now been retrieved from the song. thousands more remain in it floating towards towards russia now of course the song was a subsidiary of the a moon river.

61 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on