i re certified there was a good bye to another, shooting another safe part of american life shattered by violence. the gunman was armed with an e r 15 semi automatic rifle. when the issue comes home, it's time to act when we're stylish on this issue. the other side winds by default lady that lived over there. i was walking one of the dogs. this is why you where again will you still with me? nothing but take it off it. i think the people need to take responsibility in their own hands and be prepared if those kind of weapons were less available. we wouldn't have a lot of the shootings that we certainly wouldn't have the number of deaths ah, with

as low dose. these feel a doesn't act like a typical poison. it acts as an indication disruptor. meaning that it disturbs our hormones. the molecules that regulate, among other things, are reproductive system. with the tiniest observable doses, it can have devastating effects. in other words, between the dos and the effect of a product, research is starting to find some very unexpected relationships. and this is shaking off the world of toxicologists. we were rejecting their dog what they toxicology community hath not accepted it. they said, we reject this, the resistance of the toxicologist was well intentioned. it was also providential for the manufacturers of plastics. it's not always that people intentionally want to derail science. some people, unwittingly, through no fault of their own,

can at times be ponds in other people's efforts to produce strategic ignorance. there are many ways that ignorance is produced. some of them are malevolent. some of them are inadvertent, some of them are well intentioned, but end up having these, these outcomes. and i think it's actually extremely important for us to study the broad question of how ignorance is produced. because not everyone who produces ignorance is necessarily evil. but some of these people are the plastics industry gives financial backing to alternative research thanks to which it spokespeople can proclaim year after year, that low doses are without danger. more than 100 independent studies have shown that real life exposure to bpa is about a 1000 times below the safe intake limit set by. i'm saying one thing industry is saying another and they're needed to be explanations of how the

difference was occurring. vom sow, wanted to understand, he collected studies published on the subject. and as a true ag natal just he started investigating to find out why their conclusions diverged. during that time i didn't get a lot of sleep. i drank a lot of coffee. is conclusion. 93 percent of public studies ascertained to the harmful effects of bis phenol a at very weak doses. whereas none of a studies financed by the industry did he finally grasped the major reason for this difference. much better than a lie, a genuine conjuring trick in the laboratories. they put a lot of time and effort into figuring out how do. ready we do a study that shows no effects of this chemical. how do you go about it? first, you find the right animal model that starts with these catalogs of laboratory mice

and rats. you can choose them according to their biological parameters. you order them tailor made customized to the needs of the experiment you plan to carry out. then they're dispatched directly to your lab poop. the industry groups were using a very strange animal to try to show that this fain olay cause no arm if you are interested in showing that between a lay is not estrogenic, you would select if they nora in which busy, no lay does not become. and mr. jenny compa say you have to be very careful about the mother you chose, because you can choose their own mano, and you can choose their own malo because you the know, or you can trust them other because you know to well, how can you do this? taylor made rat to prove the innocence of bis fina les another success trick by the

illusionist of science. thus, the most insidious offensives are hidden in the details, such as in the research protocols. this group of rules so tricky to put in place which guarantee the seriousness of a study. it only takes a corrupted protocol or a broken rule to shove, scientific progress off the rails. what's at stake? here's evidence based policy making. whether policy is based on the best available evidence or by the policy is designed to satisfy a particular industry in their pursuit of profit will do to media dot did to me to sing the manufacturers of ignorance. have a target of the assemblies and parliaments of our democracies, which will ban or authorize a suspect product at the bernie brazil as see what your sister properties,

shoulder and walks the moment we give up on evidence based policy making. we've given up on democracy, eat, but they told they won't let each mit is omitted. you, boy, it's obviously the up to the point on that day. the french parliament banned the guilty baby bottles, but to ban concerns one single into chron disruptor present in one single product sold in one single country. a small victory, 20 years after the 1st alarm bells ring. a serious public health problem therefore continues to be covered up among the population. we're seeing a sharp increase in metabolic troubles, obesity, diabetes hormone dependent cancer's neuro, behavioral disorders, and in fertility. in this explosion of cases, endocrine disruptors are the prime suspects because everybody's organism is impregnated with him. meanwhile,

the defenders of the plastics industry continue to so doubt the progress of a chemical and your body does not work as harmful. anyone rude? i come. such affirmations are spread on the internet with us on our screens. many organizations with no apparent links to the industry, talk about this final, a sources of energy, the dying out of bees, the climate, food supplements, animal wellbeing, shale oil, and so on. on the internet may to measure science is spreading blue. and the target here is the general public us and our opinions. because today to say whether we're pro or anti diesel homeopathy or vague being. we click on like we tweet, we retweet. this is now public opinion anonymous,

yet global social networks seem to be the ideal form for misleading all debate. 2 6 in this building, people keep an eye on this global discussion. overpass dorsey i was july, the asti to this, he stem complex is home to mathematicians. i t expert and data specialist. we are all going to go more through like when, when they develop tools to analyze the permanent conversation on social networks. warburg, are treated hubbard. osler sher rolled over 3 months that each habit of yes and his team have analyzed $20000000.00 posts on the climate. they all come from twitter and spread across the globe. species are likely to disappear soon, who is talking to home and how to the climate skeptics and their adversaries dual over this virtual space. the team has put together

a system with which we can visualize this giant controversy. another good was the dog. a dot is one person aligned between 2 people means that one of them has passed on the other's post. the more we pass on each other's post, the closer the dots get approved. it is what one of these young who do come to tie it in the land before their eyes. the world's biggest scientific debate of hears. well, you see on i lost on the on pretty rocky formula community. the key mentorship ticket is where bianca said grew into the key math was his teacher, previous doctor duluth, community kick was shrewd. they call to he, for course, austria. so leukemia loan i call ma'am, thank out, in court, out on a little bit with once the debate is rendered. observable, miguel, what can we conclude person vessels for this, if you can, or just realized lucky off at his old went on huntington, arizona is one of one moment. whoa, it is to fix this either quickly. will they consider electoral results shocked? ish, a unique? won't you?

all day, but i saw muted tweet to results based on retreat on these all 6. yes, al koya clay goodwin history taylor, this is daniella. should i ask with this, if you not to the hardcore spreading his arguments in astronomical quantities. vast the asset of the climate skeptics in this battle for territory political enough to keep the community alive despite the gathering evidence. for the almost unanimous scientific community, global warming is unequivocal, and the impact of man is evident. this consensus however doesn't impose itself on the web web sanker category, a lawyer, the faith chelsea yet then osceola history, mississippi. he said, but awesome. although both have given a deep as good as a boot off. after the moment, you don't get the interaction with kathy immune there, she'll do twice. you don't cool or, you know, the, that is was to do fair diet. if you read visible massacre on the nose and all of

you all know nobody's it, nor sonia angles was you dignity, do said ala. natalie paused, you'll have to think you'd be mounted domingo as she sang onto the bios. who propagates climate skeptical font. and why? let's go back to the post. take, for example, this twitter account called heartland institute. what is there behind this dot? ah, the heartland institute is this house set off a quiet street. its offices are completely calm. and yet read one of the most reputed thing tanks in the world here they produce tweets, but also articles, conferences and books. the heartland institute has its expert on climate matters and its director of communication. neither of them is

a scientist which doesn't prevent this organization from massively spreading contrarian science on the climate. the best scientific evidence indicates there is no climate crisis, in fact is pretty strong that we're not facing one. i mean, the harlan institute is globally known for our work. oh it with scientists who are skeptical that humans are causing a climate crisis. and we are actually paid it probably by lastly people around the world for, for that because we're well known for that. mm. when the climate skeptic community meets up the heartland institute always tops the bill. as the sponsor or coach sponsor of conferences like this one in munich, germany, or via looking annoyed. and i courage you to assure the truth and sure ways of finding the truth of people because that is the only way that the scientific method will prevail. sound science went out. who are the researchers who continue to doubt

despite the consensus? are they skeptics because they're more conscientious, more rigorous than the others? what rational basis is there for saying that a little bit of warmer weather would be a bad thing. there is no basis for any are they paid by the oil industry to deny the effects of c? o 2 on the climate, we do not face a catastrophe of rising. she left it's customary to look for shared interests between climate skeptics and the industry. but according to now me arrest, guess the best explanation lies elsewhere. as a historian, she has studied the career pants of the 1st scientists to express doubts about climate change. some eminent physicists and what we found by reading their papers mean their diaries mean their letters to each other. that the motivation was not primarily money. it was ideological. ah,

these men had been very prominent in the cold war and made believe very deeply. and i think sincerely and authentically in the communist threat. at the time, the main battle between the soviet union and the united states was the conquest of space. america leadership, bonner, demands leadership in space. american physicists were mobilized to build a military and space program science in the service of ideology, they believed that the work they had done as scientists had helped to contain the communist threat and protect american democracy. then the communist world collapsed victory for america. and for the physicists engaged in the crusade for its supremacy agency work grew, and yet they didn't lay down their weapons. transport soon after a conference was held in washington. among the speakers was french singer,

a space race pioneer. however, he wasn't there to talk about rockets, but about the climate. oh right now, there are 2000000000 people who are overweight or obese. it's profitable to sell food that he's fatty and sugary and salty and addicted. it's not at the individual level, it's not individual willpower. and if we go on believing that never change is obesity epidemic. that industry has been influencing very deeply, the medical and scientific establishment. so what's driving the obesity epidemic? it's corporate. ah,

1st you must understand that there is no real scientific support for the so called global greenhouse warming. when the cold war ended, they seemed to need a new enemy. and the new enemy they found was environmentalism, which they interpreted is a kind of reads under the bed. what do they want? what is the real goal? real goal is political control of the economy. they're using the so called climate crisis caused by man as an excuse to do what they've always wanted to do. this is about re making and reforming society and it's in the socialist image. so darla's tooth stands in front of them and says no in the wake of the scientists who had embraced an ideology, the heartland institute is clearly the air of an era on the kid of the cold war, right? freedom of liberty is, is, is precious. and now you have something like kind of change that actually threatens

the existence of life on earth. and because it's so fundamental, it requires a significant intervention. and that's what they can't accept. why? well, because if you're emotionally invested in free markets, them climate change is a serious emotional threat because dealing with it means we have to change our approach to business. ah, and for some people that is extremely challenging, it entails giving up airplane, travel entails giving out for combustion. automobiles by the way, that means destroying one 4th of your cars, destroy one 4th of your power plant. i think i think our way of life is at risk in the scientific reason just isn't there our way of life. our frenzied consumption, our production methods. these are what we must change if science conclude that humans are responsible for global warming, which is unthinkable to some science.

sure. but not a science that threatens our beliefs and values. ah, not if it stops us from living, happy, and carefree lives. and what if inside of us, we also had a need not to know psychologists have clearly identify the individual cognitive mechanisms through which, unbeknownst to us, we construct our beliefs and limit our own knowledge. by turning our brain into a small factory of ignorance, with a professor of psychology at bristol university in the united kingdom to fund the vin dorski explores the complex relationships that we have with science. he wonders how to deal with

a scientific consensus that doesn't suit us if people are threatened by the science, but they recognize that all the find his nearly all the scientists agree on that. then they are put into the situation of conflict or cognitive dissonance. what am i gonna do with my beliefs when all the scientists agree that you know my beliefs are under threat? ah, you must be eli, i'm stealing and asking welcome to the experiment. thanks for coming. let me show you the, the professor is carrying out an experiment he received subjects willing to take part or coming. let me show you the lab. it's right here. seat and font other computer place sour. what i want you to do is just read through that. then click at the bottom when you're ready to proceed with each of them, he firstly wants to assess their behavior. when confronted with scientific issues, their political leanings and their appetite or not for conspiracy theories to do so, he exposes each subject to dozens of affirmations,

and they say whether or not they agree. there is no such thing as box animal secret organizations coming like people psychologically. socialism has many advantages over capitalism, out of 100 climate scientists. how many do you think believe that c o 2 emissions caused climate change? so this is where we now analyze the data from the experiment and real time, and what you see on the lead. the results show a correlation between their opinions on scientific issues, their political beliefs and the size of their appetite for conspiracy theories, accepting that the concert when asked you explain why. there is a scientific consensus they will resort to conspiracies. when ever the scientific consensus is in conflict with their worldviews on vaccinations, climate change explain away the scientific consensus. it is extremely helpful to just basically say, well, the scientists are all engaged in group. thank or they are pursuing a political agenda. they're all sort of in a little bit of

a conspiracy. the moment i do that i can cling to my beliefs and i can dismiss the scientific consensus. one is really striking here is that for climate change, it matters a great deal because the more conservative people law, the more they think that scientists are conspiring to produce a consensus even saw for the scientific truth threatening your vision of the world . then adopt a theory that says the scientists are all conniving against the truth. what do they want? what is the real goal? they're using so called climate crisis as an excuse in many scientific subjects. conspiracy theories, rain and each person proclaims their own theory. virus, a bio bio, engineered fibrous contains nano particles that can be activated on a time based arrangement by 5 g x in another unit. so,

as this smoot anymore, lovato said the bonding me acre shows katie again, easy, routine, thick auto humanity and we haven't sure they don't want to give it out. rumors and counter rumors abound. some denounce, signed to the plot. others denounced those who denounce big news share this with one on the networks is one side against the other. log in. have these confrontations supplanted the slow, meticulous approach of science? has it become to each their own truth? you know, if i take the us postal and drop it, we have gravity. that's not a matter of opinion. whatever our beliefs, we can't ignore reality. the victims of climate change,

the victims of fine particle pollution, or those of infectious diseases in places where we've stopped vaccinating. these faces are a reminder that we cannot ignore scientific truth without consequences. facts always impose themselves in the end. and in spite of everything, our knowledge increases gradually building up in one way or another through the ages. fuccillo beacon yes, yes. it was all i guess he the less as yeti ika. don't get a cold fixed associated good or bad? if you don't, the ruling from nickel kind 300 years ago, new scientific developments had to face off against the church today. it's really the market that has assumed the role of the church. the market has become that authority. that is hard to challenge another time, another setting. what makes the world go round today is the economy. when the law

of the market replaces that of the church, what new limits will be impose, downsize? will this new face off decide which research is accepted? of course, there are cases of the researcher caught in a conflict of interest, the scientist who ceases to remain objective because he's influenced by his financial backing. but the grip of the economy on science far outweighs these individual cases. what impact a lot of the market have on research can only be grasped, if we look at the big picture. the candle, actually delicate su, also fit a furnace in nama sip de sales cafe. the market economy frames, science in a way that values and privileges science that can be monetized, that as lucrative researchers must generate money and find it.

and so science is turned into a marketplace where everyone is trying to attract attention to lead a ball awful. so duncan gets you into a fat valhalla. now specie pc, it's really more clearly shown to boot alamahood fernandez. i need to, amanda will treat that as you know me, she would seek whatever he does. you know me, if somebody goes the counselor leads god is every the meet yielded alone. don't i do mid. yeah. shall david zulema gentle weak onto me this individual that don't dictate her he are do ms. vega once he did, he shall upset. ah christmas. yeah. as if you're ready, nickleby, she'll actually, oh no less yells of yourself and he likes you. they upgraded my mind

a bit. my artificial intelligence. this is too cool. i can walk. why you don't know yesterday now sounded dumb in acre you curious on russia. ah, less fashionable or less profitable. in the short term, certain scientific fields have been deserted. some researchers have identified what they call the problem of an done science. now that science that simply laughed unimed, vesta gated, because there's little commercial imperative in studying and mm. undone science, science that simply isn't done. the experiment never carried out the lab that never opened the epidemiological study that doesn't exist because it was never financed. the scientific books never written. the medical thesis never

published. these are the vast territories of ignorance, which we don't explore because they don't earn because we prefer not to know or because we never even imagined them. ah, our need to know is limitless in our wonder at science permanent. but we also see science under threat of virus spreading and scientific denial spreading with it is not an issue. it's not that we fall and it's not an issue for many doctors, hunter verse, he's multiply and hinder our understanding. yeah, no, no. do you last year? fear fear going get some either quite miracle cures appear. tonic wall. let me say

we can see the workings of this manufacturer of ignorance, which the pioneers of ag, natalia methodically dismantle for us question, we could talk about it. why does that work? i mean, someone that they speak at the world's most prestigious universities, and they're now listened to on forms at round tables in the media talk. and he feels fixed. his failed to let a shaft of his own business and more and more at parliamentary commissions and inquiries based on 15 years of research on the history of climate science and have collaborative still only a few. ah, but for us, the general public, there are new force. we can count on their developing tools and methods and they are shedding light on ways to protect a common asset science. and it's meticulous progress. ah

ah ah badger financial survival guide. when customers go buy, you reduce the price, then el, reduce a lower that's under cutting, but what's good for food market? is that good for the global economy? join me every posted on the alex salmon. sure. but i will be speaking to guess from

the world of politics, sport business. i'm sure business. i'll see you then. a he digs into shock revelations to the manchester arena, suicide bomber had links to a nato trained terrorist to inquire into the a trustee. his submissions from the you case, home office and counter terrorism, police turning on the president, media outlets that are usually very joe biden friendly, start to grumble let's he shouldn't run forward of the term. it's not just cove it this a danger to humanity. russia urges the will to wake up to dorman, viral threats in the arctic. the woman could soon and leash upon us.