ah, ah, is your media a reflection of reality? ah, in a world transformed what will make you feel safer? isolation, whole community. are you going the right way or are you being led somewhere? direct? what is true? what is great? 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 every day, new questions. what is there in our fields on our plate, in our medicines as the industrial era made our world toxic mm. concern 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. there are tension only 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 became mysterious. yep. hello, hooks. have nika element doesn't polezza. boy, liz, if you could, don't levy news programs everywhere showed beekeepers in total disarray. i oh here

. 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 they get a message, i'm at the same point is dead bionic. 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 bas imminent. i think this 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 ask 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 alone over at horn is obey. yeah. yeah, yeah, but that's got a sunk for proof dos. yes, psionic was intellectual business in the bathroom that you had with a ha and was image film. years me was history or the most pathetic i. p card. one

cannot eat that you dial like the national curiel loop on why he had to do with his best of as eve, new, but equally up dollars in value to look was a tentative date, the cruise until say more exploit already 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 over your ill, a hole in donald buck you. sympathy is both good, definite looking perfect. 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. why it's what's up front that can end 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 this banner change? i just was 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 in december, between the bosses of the 7 major manufacturers, collectively known as big tobacco. imagine the scene with musket run to the heart of the matter. the meeting would go down in the annals of ignorance, a challenge to every one of us. and we are 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 with it and it's a 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. i

think if they decided to make a public statement, we are pledging aid and assistance to the research effort into all phases of tobacco use of health. for this purpose, we are establishing a joint tobacco industry group. the tobacco industry research committee. good. yes. the press published the declaration tobacco industry to start scientific research. ah, believe me, friends, just feel as for your smoky pleasure and protection. every advantage known to modern science. just review. if you scientific back. then these are blast. the other sounds delicious dish slit the bow. a these pony map reduce that why me still

to oppose it? you said was key book i lank old don't to fit it every don't want me to leave that mittens, he'll speak cold, 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 find 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 that? one of the things the tobacco companies funded a lot of us would i call distracting research. the labs backed by the cigarette manufacturers defined research projects known as special projects or s p's 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. but others were totally wacky. can egg yolk or tomato juice on the skin li to tumors. what's the link between lung cancer and baldness, or between the same cancer and the month of birth? if you born in march, claim to one study, you were more at risk before with gently played goes at over plate the deal. i could a bishop equal to point that deal i called she does so meet that. yeah. why young western down in to guess wanted me a convincing strategy because a lung cancer can probably be explained by a combination of factors. identifying the different risk factors as normal and size

. multiplying avenues of research seems totally legitimate. but it can also be extremely handy for so in confusion. ah, it becomes almost impossible to prove the suspects 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 the story about tobacco. this is the story about acid rain. this is a story about the ozone hole. this is the story about pesticides. this is the story about climate change. it to an ice, this penal 8th contraceptive pills. i mean, we have now seen the strategy used over and over and over again about buying time. a similar in strategy guilt in the case of tobacco. it's 70

years already and it's still going. mm ah ah ah ah ah, ah, a ah,

island gas manufacturing, electricity, telecom transportation, all of them now have a type of infrastructure connected to the internet. so clearly realizing there's disruptive potential for that, those countries can't ignore it because it threatens national security issue. but if we take nato e u countries, virtually all of them subscribe to certain doctrines and maintains selling but tell us forces. they are a cyber army on behalf of a country. that's their job. with

ah, in the case of the dying bees, the advancement of knowledge has also been deliberately slow down the stairs. oh, the mailer left that they'll be atlantis v. i went to fact many eco smith and on the hung up is. so we're talking about decades of disinformation 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 will change everything. ah, the box he sent 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 from an anonymous source. these were internal documents from at the very highest levels of the tobacco industry. their senior scientists, 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 on 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 industry 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 at 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 doubters our product, since it is the best means of competing with the body of fact that it exists in the mind of the general public there's 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

dileskimo wants to hold black hills, duke bathrooms. you you don't see of this yellow. you less guilty debbie or no, and the punk old old me collect at a hold on a put a duke kelly pon don't, but i'll go enough night way with a single and got jenny. linda visually poodle had visited several denila minerals yet funded whitlow, the dot c. as else a mash sell going company to g back to mon only medici but days don't last strategy . the duty seed of rocket barsoom, sales stabbed exit 58 terribly committed on call. sue mutual 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 is, is not only riscas, teaches her students to identify historical obstructions of science of science. did we know the discovery of this long history of deception has led to a new field of intellectual study, a new academic field, and it's called ag natal, a g. 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 the talk, all introduce different ways of thinking about ignorance, and particularly that's phrased strategic. we're going to ask you to think about example in your own life, a strategic ignorance. oh, no fault liberals, da da woocommerce. yep. deos just killer yonce is implement. she'll conic or nipple eco vogue. take a little who got the hush? mendoza. best work it. no. or podge v x you've landed yahoo! okay. yeah. 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, natalia g needs to progress methodically. and it's

a fascinating field of inquiry with contributions from psychology, sociology, history, political science, cognitive science, computer science, network, 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 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,

the one that gives rise to the most terrible of battles. one of these battles began in this laboratory one day in 1989. carl 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 have to do . i then defy what is the source. they review each piece of lab equipment for months of suspense. and finally, they had 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 of it. yeah. a doors. okay, let me permit you press hook. it was a saw hiscock boil. hasanti is a digital ass. if i am all amanda, i think the effect of product. exxon health is what is studied by toxicologist. the accepted rule is centuries old. it's simple and seemingly makes good sense. the effect is proportionate to the quantity absorbed. it's true for

sugar is true for fat is 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, a 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, given via shashana county, augusta retweet it becomes, i'll give it upon your experience of 40 shown as any more limit, while boise divine re lexi duty, 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 ghost that would cause no effect. we were absolutely shocked because it is the considerable pressure. hazel la present, boston. don't tell it,

don't go in patsy decisions. dance, but that was this, if a breeze on boston, i didn't know was i think it is mild caddy news. we fought it, bequest on boston, some promot passcode that took synchronize, you hang them on their dest lucidity to similarly true. i ought those in a test shamae extend mahatma, let's just do the same when he colonel or those o'kelly's. you know, so i mean, you're not explicit. you saw the doors. i think this mat, ah ah, my view more broadly is that genocide is taking place far more than anyone acknowledges. right. it takes place frequently. it is taking place in virtually every country in the world. so why does it come to be called in? well, there's political will on mobilization if you remember, wanda, nobody initially wanted to name or may knew it just i was taking place. nobody

wanted to call it that. eventually that label came to take my son, not at the time when events were unfolding about political zation is if you say it's genocide, is suggest that you need to do something with a financial survival guide. daisy, let's learn about b allow, let's say i'm a true, i get any are great grief on banks of the fight. wall street broad, thank you for helping with joy. 6 that's right, fill out if you're a desk slavery, hulu. right now there are 2000000000 people who are overweight or. busy obese, it's profitable to sell food that he's fatty and sugary and salty,

and it is 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 in listening very deeply. the medical and scientific establishment for what's driving the obesity epidemic. it's court. in the weeks told stories, frivolity, russia were unveiled a list of proposals to nato for maintaining joint security, with the deputy foreign minister saying the goals now in the alliance is called when it comes to the escalation over. you correct pentagon says no u. s. military personnel will be held liable for august. butch drove to strike in afghanistan would kill 10 civilians including 7 children. we hear from a grieving.