is that people intentionally want to derail science, some people unwittingly, through no fault of their own can at times be pawns 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's 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 i didn't get a lot of sleep. i drank a lot of coffee, is conclusion. 93 percent of public studies ascertain to the harmful effects of this phenol, a at very weak doses. whereas none of the 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 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 if they nora ng, which between a lay does not become and mr. jenny compa say you have to be very careful about them more than you chose, because you can choose their own mano, and you can choose their own malo because you the know, or you can choose them other because you know to well,

how can you do this taylor made rat to prove the in since of been seen. lay 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 by the policy is designed to satisfy a particular industry in their pursuit of profit due to mid jagow did the meanest thing. the manufacturers of ignorance have a target of the assemblies and parliaments of our democracies,

which will ban or authorize a suspect product. devote at any resolution per see what they're said to book was shouldered, walk the moment we give up on evidence based policy making. we've given up on democracy, e put, they told they lo blessed each mid omitted. the boy says don't be speed up. did it 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 and different

disruptors are the prime suspects because everybody's organism is impregnated with him. meanwhile, defenders of the plastics industry continue to so doubt the presence of the chemical and your body does not use as harmful anyone, rude ag homes? such affirmations are spread on the internet with the 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 scientists 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. oh, perfect posture. she was july. the institute is he stem complex. his home to mathematicians, i t experts and data specialist. we are all going to go more through like when they develop tools to analyze the permanent conversation on social networks. walker are treated labrador. she rolled over 3 months that each of it of 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 here in north america. 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, that is what went up into young duca nuclei. and before their eyes, the world's biggest scientific debate it hears well, you see on a loss on the, on twitter ocoee formula community. the key mentorship ticket is a web younger said grew into the key method 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 routing and once the debate is rendered. observable, miguel, what can we conclude person vessels for this particular carrier? israel as the ocoee office is a little huntington, a gina is one of from one word. it is to features this either quickle's the

considered of electoral results. show active ha, quote. you on the bus home you tweet to results reduce on retreat on these all 6? yes. al koya clay good in history. taylor, this is marianna today. yeah, this is jill out to the hard core, 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. amalia, if it chelsea yet, then osceola history. mississippi is super dawson, although both have given a deepest goose as a boot off. after the moment it won't kill your actual jessie immune you there,

she'll do twice. you done. cool. well, you know, the ladies will shoot to fair guides if in red, visibly passive groaning, those and all of you all know nobody's it don't. sonya who's was you? dignity do, said tyler, new boy paused, you'll have to think you'd be mould myoshi. sounded on to look by yost, who propagates climate skeptical thought. and why. let's go back to the posts. take, for example, this twitter account called part land 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, 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 painted probably by lively people around the world for, for that because we're well known for that. 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, one via the invoicing and i courage you to share the truth and sure ways of finding the truth for people, because that is the only way that the scientific method will prevail. sound science

or when are you? 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 sea level. 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

primary 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. b, american physicists were mobilized to build a military and space program science in the service of ideology, ne, believe that the work they had done as scientists had held to contain the communist threat and protect american democracy. then the, i mean, the squirrels collapsed o victory for america. and for the physicists engaged in the crusade for its

supremacy agency workgroup. 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 a higher than we had said i had had been allowed to get them outside on mechanic and by then coffee thought she home. an odd at a by then is a shift of on a fiscal non work force. so it looks much. so if

it was, if we had to move the po multiple and ginger ma connect to. so that gives you how, what's up, but we shall 0 here. moseto will do the loan with helpful symbol. so this is what i can the button and who it man a loudly hold on it. that was you. how any comes in the, hey, do what a a with my i can now maybe, maybe i'm ready for with so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy

confrontation, let it be an arms race is on offensive, very dramatic development. only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successfully, very difficult time. time to sit down and talk 1st, you must understand that there is no real scientific support for the so called global greenhouse warming. when the cold war ended, they seem 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, 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 and

the scientific reason just isn't there. our way of life. our frenzy 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 that our own knowledge. by turning our brain into a small factory of ignorance.

mm. mm hm. 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 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 a lab. it's right here. seat on 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 ox, animal secret organizations come and 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 belief and the size of their appetite for conspiracy theories. accepting that the concert when asked to 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. what is really striking here is that for climate change, it matters a great deal because the more conservative people, ah, the more they think that scientists are conspiring to produce a consensus and 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 reign. 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 effects. isn't another jeweler. oh no. actually smoot any more of a placebo? sit on the me a could cushion katie all get easy, ritchie, bicycle told him anything. and we haven't sure. they just don't want to give it out . rumors and counter rumors abound some downside to the plot. others denounced those who denounce big news share this with one on the networks. he's one side against the other blogs. mm hm. have these confrontations supplanted the slow, meticulous approach of science?

has it become to each their own truth? you know, if i think the us postal and 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 beacon yes, yes. it was all i guess he delicious. yeti. ika don't get a cold fixed associated good or bad. he done to ruin from the cold 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 is 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 account,

actually delicate this yellow. so fair a few months in november, the sip de sales can affect 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 scientists turned into a marketplace where everyone is trying to attract attention to the level. so duncan gets you into a fat vella, los pc, pc, it's really more key. so to alamahood will not as any to amanda will crease it that as you knew me, she would secret with heavy needs. as you know me have all the goals against mids, gun was heavy, the meat yielded alone. don't undo mid rashad of its yellow chandel week

onto me. this individual that new technology are doing is vague. what he did, he shouted, ah, is it you're ready? nickleby soon actually. oh yo yos are stephens likes, young. they upgraded my mind a bit. my artificial intelligence. this is too cool. i can walk. why don't the ballast ago yesterday now sounded dumb in aiko new kid s oh sasha? ah less fashionable or less profitable in the short term, certain scientific feels have been deserted. some researchers has identified what they call the problem of and done science. now that science that simply left an investigated because there is 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 with 19 is not an issue. it's not that legal and it's not an issue for many doctors hunter versus multiply and hinder our understanding. no, no. do you last year? fear fear going, get some either quite miracle cures appear. tonic walk, let me see if 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, 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 talk. and he seals fixed pittsville dealership in 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. ah, but from the general public,

there are new force. we can count on their developing tools and methods and they're shutting light on ways to protect a common asset science. and it's meticulous progress. ah ah ah ah,

my view more broadly is the genocide has taken place. far more than anyone acknowledges. right. it takes place frequently. it has taken place in virtually every country in the world. so why does it come to be called in? well, there's political will mobilization if you remember, wanda, nobody initially wanted to name or may knew it just i was saying place nobody wanted to call it that initially that label came to take place, but not at the time when events were unfolding in border political zation is if you say it's genocide, is suggest that you need to do something with blue 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 with what's driving the obesity epidemic. it's corporate mocking moon. is of the top, sorry, so us over the last 7 days, russia unveils a list of proposals to nato. full maintaining joint security is loss goes deputy for a minute to save the balls, not in the lines his court when it comes to the escalation of ukraine. dependence again said none of its personnel will be held liable for the barged throne strike enough gun this last summer, which killed 10 civilians including 7 children. and the week we heard from a grieving relative to nobody.