we certainly wouldn't have the number ah, ah, is your media a reflection of reality? in the world transformed what will make you feel safer? isolation, whole community. are you going the right way? where are you being led somewhere? direct. what is true? what is faith? in the world corrupted, you need to descend ah, to join us in the depths or remain in the shallows. ah oh

er er every day, more needs more technology available. more comfort? more products on the shelves. ah, and everyday new questions. what is there in our fields on our plate, in our medicines, as the industrial era made our world toxic mm.

cern is growing, ah, citizens accuse industries of hiding the truth from us and industry denies it. how can we judge? so we turn to science, we ask researchers to be the judges of these new battles. for us. we demand that they step into the arena. we are living in a world where there are many people who have a vested interest in fighting information, finding scientific evidence, and discrediting even the notion that science could provide the truth about the natural world. they are constantly seeking to derail science. so we need to identify these attacks to expose the maneuvering of those trying to stand in the way of knowledge. and in that context, it's essential for us to understand who these people are, what they do, why they do it, and how they do it. ah, and we have to understand how it is that the public sometimes participates in the spreading of this deliberate ignorance. so we need to visit this landscape of

manufactured ignorance. in northern greece. why can most of the developed world bees are the victims of an ongoing carnage? well known since the 19 ninety's. this has now become a textbook case. a point from where we can begin our exploration of the manufacturer of ignorance. things always start with an enigma. in greece like elsewhere, experts on bees didn't understand what was happening and why ne, it but can i mistake? the pillow hooks ethnic i element does is paulette a boy. elizabeth could only be news programs everywhere showed beekeepers in total to so oh secondly,

the suspect shows up. this time it was a new generation of insecticides in our fields, the mo, the latest baby of the agro chemical industry at the time to pull active ingredients. every syngenta formulation is the result of years of careful investigation and thorough research by our scientists. you moment these new products were spread on our crops down to the draw be started dying in their millions of active ingredients. if the get a message, i'm at the same point is debbie, unequal thirdly, science is asked to investigate. to do so funny how gina has been constantly going back and forth between her hives and her lab, emerson embassy wellness. i think the place of almost every benevolent place but looking for the truth has proven to be a game of cat and mouse. the usual task for scientists

is to retreat into the calm of their labs, then explain what's being observed on the ground. we asked them to shed light on the mystery of the dying bes, just as they have explained so many other phenomena. the role of science is to highlight natural mechanisms and reach an explanation for the slightest observable fact. this is how science normally progresses my solving more and more mysteries and in principle, our knowledge of the world we live and increases. however, this fine principle sometimes has a few hiccups. for scientific observers, the case of the vanishing bees is emblematic of this with something like ease and pesticides, you should have been able to investigate it by collecting data by following the evidence where it's taking you. the crux of the idea is that when we find the evidence that tells us what's happening, we tell the truth,

the whole truth and nothing but the truth. and we let the chips fall where they may, we commit in a way of, you know, committing to accepting the truth of those findings. but in the case of the bees, that's not exactly how things went in the early 2 thousands government expert report showed the toxic effect of even very low doses of new nicotine, always on bees. and yet, for more than 20 years, there has been no unanimity. no consensus on the link between these pesticides and the disappearance of bees wire things lagging so much. you need to be a very shrewd observer to see the whole picture. mon over at horn is obey. yeah. yeah, yeah, but that's got a sunk for proof dos. yes, psionic wasn't on it. pathogen that you had with

a juan with emerge. if you'll use me with history on the most pathetic i. p card one cannot eat that you dial like the national curiel loop. one. why? yes. good with this base of as evening. but you could up down to dollars to invite you to look was advantage if kate, the cruise until the mornings ploy and where the aucker. this is a quick search in a scientific study database proves it. as soon as pesticides were suspected, the number of public or private studies focusing on other possibilities skyrocketed . 2010. the veterinary authorities were confused yet, but over your ill, a hole in the hold back with you. when but they say, if you both could definitely look into the more studies there were, the less beekeepers to make sense of at all. it seems like a paradox until you look back to an older case. when you see a flourishing of new studies emerge in any particular area, a little bit ironically,

it creates the appearance of being dedicated to pursuing the truth. but it takes me directly back to the case of big tobacco. we do what's up front at cal and up brown to head up the filter to understand we need to go back to the 1950s a time when tobacco was treated with total recklessness. so you blend mean on the back? oh, boy, the back gate. yeah. that's why, but this recklessness wouldn't last. what does the spawn drain? i just back in december 1953. the bad news broke researchers had just provoked cancer in mice by painting them with tar from cigarette. after this discovery war broke out, the tobacco companies had a real crisis because they can't contest the evidence and say it's wrong,

they should just say we don't know. and so the leaders of all the major cigarette companies got together in new york city. we now know that a meeting took place at the plaza hotel in new york and december, between the bosses of the 7 major manufacturers, collectively known as big tobacco, imagined the scene musket run to the heart of the matter. the meeting would go down in the annals of ignorance, was a challenge to every one of us. and we were all in this together unify. confronted with scientific progress, the cigarette manufacturers came up with a plan. they launched this campaign in which they said, you know, we're aware of the science. we think there are problems listed in this matter of deep concern to us. now we are beginning

a campaign to spell out that basic point so that no one will fail to get it. they decided to make a public statement. we are pledging aid and assistance to the research effort into all phases of tobacco use in health. for this purpose, we are establishing a joint tobacco industry group. the tobacco industry research committee. with the press published the declaration, tobacco industry distorts scientific research with believe, a friends just to feel as for your smoking, pleasure, and protection. every advantage known to modern science just reveal gives you scientific back. then these are plas dollar sound to de la sheshe split the book

and these pony medical idealists. and while i'm is your 2 apples you will do some. wow. key voc, i long cold, did don't lafitte, every, nowhere near to these that mr. speak? comb less young. 8, debbie that's really using science against itself. the explicit use of science again, science i think, does represent a kind of watershed to systematically fund the scientific research in order to undermine science, effectively fighting fire with fire, that's a watershed moment. so after they do side of this, how did they operationalize in one of the things the tobacco companies funded a lot of what i call distracting research labs, backed by the cigarette manufacturers, defined research projects known as special projects or espied a whole arsenal for diverting science they researched for example, lung cancer and non smokers. they searched for links to habitat working conditions,

personal habits. they experimented on rabbits to see if lung cancer could be caused by toxins or viruses. big tobacco thus generously financed hundreds of research projects. some of these projects turned out to be very useful, such as research into the precursors of cardiovascular disease. put others were totally wacky. can egg yolk or tomato juice on the skin, lead to tumors. what's the link between lung cancer and baldness, or between the same cancer and the month of birth? if you were born in march, claimed one study, you were more at risk. a foot gently a plate goes to a bite delila called a bishop vehicle to point that the locals cedar. so me been yeah, oh no, i yelled up was so long enough to get you into any a convincing strategy. because a lung cancer can probably be explained by a combination of factors. identifying the different risk factors as normal in size

. multiplying avenues of research seems totally legitimate, but it can also be extremely handy for so in confusion. it becomes almost impossible to prove the suspect's guilt, and that's the aim that's extremely well understood. and that designed play book for pretty much every other science denial that has followed this the story about tobacco. this is a story about acid rain. this is a story about the ozone hole. this is a story about pesticides. this is the story about climate change. nick, it to another this, you know, a conscious of 2 pills. i mean, we have now seen the strategy used over and over and over again. about buying time is similar in strategic daniel, in the case of tobacco,

it's 70 years already and it's still going. mm. oh need a happy hey, i know you said it does not allow the victim though you're not solid mechanic and by then coffee for sure. and i believe by then is a shift of on a is going on more with the polk

multiple and ginger my can connect to. so that gives you a simple so this you say yes, i can button and it man a lab with a, a a what i can i maybe maybe i'm not even all the panoramic know borderline to nationalities

and you as a merge we don't have with the we don't on the back seat, the whole world leads to take action to be ready. people are judgment. come in, we can do better, we should be better. everyone is contributing each in their own way. but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever. the challenge is great. the response has been mess. so many good people are helping us. it makes us feel very proud that we're in it together with ah, in the case of the dying bees, the advancement of knowledge has also been deliberately slow down. this devil in

may or left that they'll be atlantis, u. v. i went back, my mini equal submitted on the going up is, so we're talking about decades of dis, information and decades of delay. in the meantime, the companies are still making gobs of money. mm hm. mm mm. mm. when a scientific life has been constructed over several decades, where do the 1st cracks begin to appear? for 40 years after the 1st alerts on tobacco, somewhere in the u. s. a humble employee performed an act that would change everything ah, the box,

he st finally arrived in california at the university of san francisco. on that day, professor glance was in for a surprise on may 12th 1994, a box of documents landed in my office for an anonymous stores. these were internal documents from at the very highest levels of the tobacco industry. their senior scientist, their senior lawyers, their senior management, their senior public relations, people talking very, very frankly about what they knew about the dangers of smoking in this was an an hope for treasure, for the professor. it was like a new world stumbling into a new world. the leaked documents increased in numbers. the truth broke. the tobacco industry bosses were cornered gentlemen. the reason disclosure of documents have shaken my confidence that your company's care about the truth. these documents

suggest possible manipulation of scientific research by industrial attorney. if these things are true, then you should know that this kind of behavior is unacceptable and will not be allowed. faced with the proof out of the tobacco bosses were forced to make decades of secret archives. public series, like the other collection were started out. a few 1000 pages is now up around 93000000 pages. these documents are now kept in the university of san francisco archives. they contain all the details of a massive manipulation of science. the tactics deployed, the researchers recruited and the sums of money involved. among these documents, one internal memo from 1969 sums up on his own. what the tobacco industry had decided to produce doubt as our product since it is the best means of competing

with the body of fact that exists in the mind of the general public. it is also the means of establishing a controversy. the key strategy is the creation of doubt about science. doubt is a perfect weapon. it's effective but also pernicious because tao is legitimately part of science. in fact, it's an essential driver of science. we investigate things because we have questions about them because we're curious or because we doubt the existing explanation is adequate. so we need doubt in science. the more good it will coll the axioms once to hope that his book battles. yo, yo don't see this. yo. yo less guilty debbie or no, and the bulk old old me collect 80. hold on a printed book, kelly pon don't, but i'll go enough night way. we are still going. golf galena, visually understood. we saw danella angels, jo funded whitlow, the dot c. as else a mash sell going company to g banks. mon only made these the but dies. don't get

strategy. the duty seed of rocket barsoom seattle's stub exit 58. their b committed uncles to musical duke. so what the tobacco industry did was to take a virtue and turning to vice the use of scientific method against science itself. that's what these documents revealed. these windfalls enthuse historians and whistleblowers. they have even inspired a new field of study. how many of you before this week? you something about the history of tobacco? yeah, most people. okay. this is naomi roskus teaches her students to identify historical obstructions of science and science. did we know the discovery of this long history of deception has led to a new field of intellectual study and new academic field, and it's called agnew itala gee. and that means the study of ignorance. ag no. tal logy was born. now,

academics attempt to unravel the main springs of our ignorance to look into what we don't know. a curious field of study. we were laughed at at 1st because people thought it was not academic to study the absence of knowledge to study ignorance. but i think people are, are laughing a bit less now and starting to be a bit worried because we sense and they realize how pervasive the problem might be . mm hm. what prevents us from knowing more people are asking this question, encouraging experts and ignorance to leave their universities and speak out publicly. but over the course of this talk all introduce different ways of thinking about ignorance and particularly this phrase strategic. we're going to ask you to think a bad example in your own life, a strategic ignorance or no fault. li mcdonald's don't to woocommerce. yep. did yos,

just gather yonce, is implement. she'll conic nipple eco booked. echo little is all got the hush there . those are best we'll get no or pods. e x eve landed yahoo. okay. why? so we're now invited to look for obstacles to our knowledge. things that holds the progress of science deliberately or not. and sometimes even what we prefer not to know, unraveling. all that is no small issue. that's why the study of ignorance or ag, natal logy needs to progress methodically. and it's a fascinating field of inquiry with contributions from psychology, sociology, history, political science, cognitive science, computer science networks, science. there are lots of disciplines involved that can help us understand how ignorance is being manufactured and how we can protect ourselves against it. with this new awareness is still in its early days. but the

races on because of the strategic production of ignorance continues to be perfected . to debunk it, we must often plunge into the detail of scientific practices in innovations regularly arrived on the market and with them a fair share of suspicion. are they a threat to our health and more importantly, at what dosage. that's the big question that the one that gives rise to the most terrible of battles. one of these battles began in this laboratory one day in 1989. carla sunshine and anna soto are both biologists for years they have been trying to solve the mystery of cellular proliferation and cancer. suddenly,

before they're very eyes, some control cells cultivated in a test tube began to proliferate for no apparent reason. it was a real sherrill caults investigation, trying to find out where it came from because that is the 1st thing you had to do. i then defy what is the source. they review each piece of lab equipment for months of suspense. and finally, they hand their culprit, the centrifuge tubes they were made of a material that should have been inert, but wasn't the plastic used contained and dispersed a substance that acted like the hormone estrogen? girls and i were very disturbed by this finding. we thought that this was a big deal if you can find such a substance here, can it be elsewhere in toys?

bottles, food containers in all the plastics that end up in the environment. and how does it affect our organism? look like history said that, um yeah, a doors. okay, let me permit to pray for expos. they saw his coverage off. boy, boy hasanti is a digital ass. if i'm all amanda, talk about that the effect of product x on health is what is studied by toxicologist. the accepted rule a centuries old. it's simple and seemingly makes good sense. the effect is proportionate to the quantity absorbed. it's true for sugar. it's true for fat. it's true for pretty much any product. according to the rules of toxicology, the dose makes the poison, which by extension means that anything below the dose isn't a poison. according to this rule of plastic with the characteristics of a hormone that ends up in a baby's mouth should impose any problem. because the quantity of synthetic

estrogen ingested is tiny or true or false. this is the crux of the battle. unique styles give a call via shashana county rested in between it becomes al event upon your experience with 40 shown is anymore le montoya, boise. d. very lex unity, the blessed if you cannot accept louise finra, this has the structure of and estrogenic drug. they are using a sex or bone to make plastic. this is insane. for years, professor vom sal and his team observed mice exposed to different doses of bis fini lay to measure the traces of the product they explored what happens at the limits

of detection using ultra sensitive machines. and what they discovered, shook the world of science. in fact, the damage to the reproductive system was occurring at $25000.00 times below what had been considered a dose that would cause no effect. we were absolutely shocked. secretly, harbor is considerable, presume, hazel. let present boston don't tell it, don't go in. patty de systems dance, but i've, wow, this, if a breeze on bottom, i did those i from disney mal canada's pre fault it bequest on bottle some pre mom, passcode, like boxing corners. yeah, global tear dest lucidity to sim only truly, i ought those in a test, shamae extend mama, la cynthia, to sing when he colonel or those. okay. and is your muscle, i mean, you're not explicit, he's only doors. i think this matter with

you talk about a space rate on hypersonic weapons. we talk about the fact that will be arranged on fossil energy. we talk about a democrat demarcus, she tries is in the u. s. so if you don't think that's outrageous enough that you know is only because today the everyday life seems to me as that someone has been doing this for 30 years. it's very difficult actually, to make a re depiction compete with the reality of the rages day by day life that we're seeing. good right now, there are 2000000000 people who are overweight or obese. it's profitable to sell food that he's fancy and sugary and salty and addicted. it's not at the individual

level, it's not individual well power. and if we go on believing that never change this obesity epidemic, that industry has been influencing very deeply. the medical and scientific establishment in what's driving the obesity epidemic, it's corporate with usually friendly u. s. media outlets are starting to say joe biden shouldn't run again for president . is american covey deaths top 800000 ramp and inflation. drugs can see the prices through the written to position in germany to the countries new cove measures with assassination plots and accusations of naziism. focus cobit that's a threat to humanity. a church is the world to wake up to dove and viral.