for as low dose this 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, our reproductive system. with the tiniest observable doses, it can have devastating effects. in other words, between the dose in the effect of a product, research is starting to find some very unexpected relationships. and this is shaking off the world of toxicologists. 8 we were rejecting their dog law, the toxicology community has 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 the 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 of own that

real life exposure to b j 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 south wanted to understand he collected studies, published on the subject and as a true ag, natalia 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 fino, a at very weak doses. whereas none of the studies financed by the industry did he finally grasp 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 rat. you can choose them according to their biological parameters. you order them taylor made customized to the needs of the experiment you planned to carry out . then they are dispatched directly to your lab poop. the industry groups were using up very strange animals to try to show that this fin olay cause no arm if you are interested in showing that between a lay is not estrogenic. you would select if they nora ng which between a lay does not become an esther, jamie compa say you have to the very careful about them and your toes.

because you can choose their own model. and you can choose their own ludlow because you the no. or you can truth them all 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 hears 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 mid jago did the

meanest thing. the manufacturers of ignorance have a target uncle, the assemblies and parliaments of our democracies, which will ban or authorize a suspect product. at deborah, any resolution per see what they're said to put was shown throughout the moment we give up on evidence based policy making. we've given up on democracy is political, they low blessed each middle may do people see obviously they're 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 bureau, 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 continued to so doubt the progress of a chemical and your body does not work as harmful anyone. rubicon, with such affirmations are spread on the internet with the us on our screens, many organizations with no apparent links to the industry, talk about of his 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 raping. 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. 6 in this building, people keep an eye on this global discussion with apostrophe i was in the institute as he stem complex is home to mathematicians. i t experts and data specialist or all of those to go more through like when they develop tools to analyze the permanent conversation on social networks. ah, mobile goods are treated hubbard. austria rolled over 3 months that each of it 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 and out here in north america, a dot he's 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 appointed is what to put up into young ducal nuclei sort of land before their eyes. the world's biggest scientific debate it hears well, you see on a loss on the point, pretty rocky formula community. the key math was his teacher. you were bianca said, grew into the team at the 15 peggy's dr. do look community college, should they call to key 4 course austria saluki, mo, loan echo, ma'am. thank out. in court, out on a little bit with once the debate is rendered observable, well, what can we conclude person with, if you can, or just realized lucky oftentimes is

a little huntington ayana is one of one woman will. it is to fit your needs is either quickle's to consider electoral results, show active, a unique warnky on the bus or military to results reduced on the street on these all 6. yes. al koya clay in history. taylor, this is marianna today. yeah, this is jill out to the hardcore spreading his arguments in astronomical quantities . that's the asset of the climate skeptics in this battle for territory or 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 tag, amalia, the face chelsea yet then osceola history. mississippi is super dawson,

although both had given a deepest goose at separate off after the moment it on the interaction with jesse me there she'll do it. was you that cool? the, you know, the, it is, was through the fair guides. if you read visible to pass are going on in those and all the all. nobody's it. don't the sorry i was was you dignity? deuce at taylor new boy paused. you'll need to thank you. the most the men, yoshi sang long to look by else who propagates climate skeptical thought. and why? let's go back to the posts. take for example, this twitter account called heart land institute. what is there behind this dot? ah, the heartland institute is this house set off a quiet street. its offices are completely com, one, and yet read one of the most reputed think 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, it's pretty strong that we're not facing on. i mean, the harlot 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 vicky 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 sciences 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? rational basis is there for saying that a little bit of warmer weather would be a bad thing. that 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 paths of the 1st scientist 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 states. b, 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 so the physicists engaged in the crusade for its supremacy agency work group, and yet they didn't lay down their weapons. transport soon after a conference was held in washington. among the speakers was fred 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 is fatty and sugary. all the other things, 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. mm hm. and what's driving the obesity epidemic?

it's corporate in look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. at the point, obviously is to great trust, rather than fear i would like to take on various jobs with artificial intelligence, real summoning with a robot must protect its own existence with with

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 as a kind of reads under the bed. what do they want? what is the real goal? the 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 remaking 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, then 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 and 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 concludes 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 identified the individual cognitive mechanisms through which, unbeknownst to us, we construct our beliefs and that 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, stiff and 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 scientists, 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? i, you must be eli. i'm steven and asking welcome to the experiment. thanks for coming . let me show you the, the professor is carrying out an experiment he receives subjects willing to take part or coming. let me show you a lab. it's right here. seat and font other computer place. so 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 ox. any more secret organizations come and 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 once you see on the left, 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 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 a scientific truth threatening your vision of the world. then adopt a theory that says the scientists are all conniving against the truth. quarterly one. what is the real goal? they're using the so called climate crisis as an excuse in many scientific subjects . conspiracy theories reign. and each person proclaims their own theory virus. a bio bio engineered virus contains nano particles that can be activated on

a time based arrangement by 5 g u of accent isn't a loss jeweler. oh, actually it's similar to any model of a vehicle said to bomb the need, acre shows katie, or get his a receipt back. they caught him anything. and we haven't sure. they just don't want to give it out. rumors and counter rumors abound some denounce, signed to the plot. others denounced those who denounce being new. share this with on the networks he's one side against the other lawyer. mm. have these confrontations supplanted the slow, meticulous approach of science? has it become to each their own truth? you know, if i take this palatable drop it, we have gravity. that's right,

a matter of opinion. whatever our beliefs, we can't ignore reality. the victims of climate change, the victims of fine particle pollution. for 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 ve cabinets yells, it was all i guessed he, the less s u t. e could don't get a cold fixed associated good or bad. if he done to ruin from nickel tank 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 which makes the world go round today is the economy. went along, the market replaces that of the church. what new limits will be in po on science. will this new face off decide which research is accepted? and of course, there are cases of the research are 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 the laws of the market have on research can only be grasped. if we look at the big picture, the account actually delicate this yell, so fit a fast enough memory. sip dis, yells cafe, the market economy frames, science in a way that values and privileges science that can be monetize,

that as lucrative researchers must generate money and find it. and so science is turned into a market place where everyone is trying to attract attention to lead a ball. awful thought uncle beat you into a fat vela no speech to pc. it really moved, lee felt a boot allenwood well known as any to me. and am will release at that as you know me. he would seek whatever he does. you know me have all the goals that goldsmith's gun zebedee meet, yielded alone. don't undo mid yet, shall david's yellow, gentle weak onto me. this he did see that note doctor, he and i'll do is vedo, etc. a did he shouted, ah, teresa as if you're ready lecoq piece. you actually yelled. las yells,

others offends he likes you. they upgraded my mind a bit. my artificial intelligence is too cool. i can walk. why don't we follow yesterday now sounded dumb in aiko knew he had asked alicia 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 left on investigated 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. 0 one thing is not an issue. it's not that lethal. 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 water. 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 is, why does that what i mean, some law that they speak at the world's most prestigious universities, and they're now listened to on forms at round tables in the media. took any sales, fix pittsville dealership as well. 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. 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, and with a failure to allow bond market to reflect to market forces as resolved in bifurcation in the economy. where the most corrupt are rewarded for committing crimes. j. p. morgan being a prime example, and if you have morals or ethics,

you're penalized. if you're not out there still, it's dealing alluding. then you're going to be homeless. and that's american today . it's just that a this ours headline stories on art. see, russia publishes a list of proposals to nate, so for a maintaining security with the countries deputy foreign minister is saying that paul is not firmly in the alliances court when it comes to d escalation. also coming up on the program today, we dig into disturbing revelations stuff that manchester are rena suicide.