rail 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 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, why didn't get a lot of sleep. i drank a lot of coffee. his conclusion, 93 percent of public studies ascertain 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 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 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 up very strange animals to try to show that this fin olay cause no harm if you are interested in showing that between a lay is not estrogenic. you would select a 3 norah ng which basically normally does not become and mr. jenny compa say you have to be very careful about the mother and you chose because you can choose the romano. and you can choose the romano, because you the know or you can truth the mother 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, offensive or 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 whether policy is designed to satisfy a particular industry in their pursuit of profit due to mid jago did the meanest thing. the manufacturers of ignorance have a target of the assemblies and parliaments of our democracies, which will ban or of rise

a suspect product. you do look at their bernice brazil own per see what they're said to book was shouldered, walked the moment we give up on evidence based policy making. we've given up on democracy is political. they lo, blessed each middle may do. the boy says, 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 rang . 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 continued to so doubt the progress of the chemical and your body does not rule as harmful anyone. rubicon, with 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 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 wrapping we click on like we tweet, we read. this is now public opinion. ah anonymous yet global

social networks seem to be the ideal form for misleading all debate. 2 in this building, people keep an eye on this global discussion. perfect posterity, or was it july, the asti to this? he stem complex is home to mathematicians. i t experts and data specialists. 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, austria sher rolled over 3 months that each of our yes and his team have analyzed $20000000.00 posts on the climate. the 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 of your voice with 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 approved. it is what one of these young who do come to pine and before their eyes, the world's biggest scientific debate it hears. well, you see on i lost on the point, pretty rocky formula community. the key mentorship ticket you were bianca said, grew into the key. math was 15 previous doctor duluth community college. should they call to key 4? course austria. so leukemia loan echo ma'am. thank out. in court. out on a movie i once the debate is rendered. observable, my job, what can we conclude person vessels for the 15th. and i just realized, lucky off at his old huntington ayana is one of one moment. whoa, it is to fix this either quickly. reynolds. the consider electoral results show

active a unique warnky on the bus on the retreat to results reduced on retreat on utah ccr . choir clay in history taylor. this is marianna today. yeah. ask with his empty chill out to the hard core, spreading his arguments in astronomical quantities. that's 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 junker category, amaya the 5th chelsea yet did not see all it is came into the city a super dawson, although both green a deep as good as a boot off after the moment it on the interaction with jesse immune there,

she'll do twice you the cool of a, you know, the bananas should be fair guides. if you read visible pos, are going on in those and all of you all knew about his id number. sonya angles was you dignity due to taylor new po, aicpa as your leave, the thank you, the mountain men, yoshi sang along to look by else who propagates climate skeptical. fought 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 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, it's pretty strong that we're not facing on, on the harlot institute, who 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 probably by law hefley 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 co 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 with 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 fate. 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 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 they 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 hickory for america. and for 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. ah, welcome to max hazard, financial survival guide. looking forward to year. that's without the ice. this is what happens. dimensions in britain. does this up of you watch kaiser report in terms of security and events, europe stance at a crossroads, should outdated cold war era? structures be maintain like nato in over reliance on the u. s. or should europe define and shoulder responsibilities for its own defense? and what about russia? ah, ah,

right now there are 2000000000 people who are overweight or. busy obese, it's profitable to sell food that is pricey 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 will never change this obesity epidemic, that industry has been influencing very deeply. the medical and scientific establishment. mm. 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 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 we 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, 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 size. 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, ah, a professor of psychology at bristol university in the united kingdom defend the van 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? ah, you must be eli, i'm stephen 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 the lab. it's right here. seat in front of their 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 facts. any more secret organizations can manipulate 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 let, 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 the 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 virus contains nano particles that can be activated on a time based arrangement by 5 g 0 x i didn't, and without you know, it's similar to any multiple. tako said the bonding ne acres shows katie or get easy returning think 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. this others denounced those who denounce big news. share this

with on the networks he's one side against the other. along with have these confrontations supplanted the slow, meticulous approach of science. has it become to each their own truth? you know, if i take the 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 gets yells it too, so i guess he the less as yeti ika don't get no cold fixed associated go bad. if you don't ruin from nickel kind 300 years ago, you 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. when the law of the market replaces that of the church, what new limits will be imposed on science? will this new face off decide which research is accepted? 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 a lot of the market have on research can only be grasped. if we look at the big picture, the candle actuated alec, and su also fit a furnace in nama. sip. de sales will fit 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 scientists turned into a market is where everyone is trying to attract attention. ah to lead a ball awful. so duncan beats you into a fat valhalla, no specie pc,

it really move. kitty felt a boot alamahood. now does that need to? amanda will crease it that as you know me, she would seek whatever he does in the week of all the course that counts mids. gun debbie. the me yielded alone. don't. i'll do mid rashad of it's zulema gender week on domains this individual. see that no one picked on her head and i'll do ms. vega once he did, he shall succeed. ah christmas. yeah. if you're ready, nickleby, she'll actually, oh yelled las yells, others of things he likes young. they upgraded my mind a bit. my artificial intelligence. this is too cool. i can walk. why you don't know yet to do now sounded dumb in a canoe kit. s o shy ah less fashionable or less profitable. in the short term, certain scientific fields have been deserted. some researchers has

identified what they call the problem of and 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 in $1000.00 is not an issue. it's not that lethal. and it's not an issue for many doctors hunter versus multiply and hinder our understanding. yeah, no, no, no. do you last year? fear fear going get some either quite miracle cures appear hot water. let me say we can see the workings of this manufacturer of ignorance, which the pioneers of ag, natalia g, 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

seals fixed as failed to let a shaft of his office 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

ah, ah, failure to allow markets to reflect to market forces has resulted in a 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 stealing alluding, then you're going to be homeless. and that's america today. it's just that a happy hey,

a allowed them to get them outside and by then coffee. so she has an odd at a by then it's a shift of on a foursome with multiple multiple and ginger mark on that to. so that gives you a symbol. so this is a, you know, it's a button and what else is it a philosophy on it this year. how and it comes in and say, hey, do what

a a i met with ah, our new german language channel, our t d e is embroiled in a legal dispute as europe's media regulator, questions it's broadcast license ortiz management stresses the license was obtained in full compliance with european law, with russia publishes a list of proposals to nato for maintaining security with the country's deputy foreign minister saying the ball is now in the alliance's court when it comes to de escalation. also we dig in to dis.