August 12, 2025 • 32 mins
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Luck and load down. Michael Very Show is on the air.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
All right, Clinton, you called down the thunder, Well, now.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
You've got it. You see that it says United States Marshall.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
Don't kill me.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Take a good look at him, Mike, because that's how
you're gonna hand on.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
The cowboys are finished. Do you understand me? I see
a red sass, I kill.
Speaker 4 (00:33):
My man wearing it?
Speaker 5 (00:35):
So run, cur Bred, Come all the other curves alive comming?
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Do you tell them I'm coming? And Hell's comment with me,
your heir.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
Hell comment with that very serious, very for some of
thing's out of control, but we're gonna put it in
control very quickly, like we did.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
On the southern border.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
I'm announcing a historic action to rest, thank you, our
nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam, and squalor and worse.
This is Liberation Day in DC, and we're going to
take our capital back. We're taking it back under the
authorities vested in me as the President of the United States.
(01:16):
I'm officially invoking Section seventy forty of the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act, you know what that is, and
placing the DC Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control,
and you'll be meeting the people that will be directly
involved with that. Very good people, but they're tough and
(01:39):
they know what's happening, and they're better be In addition,
I'm deploying the National Guard to help re establish law
order of public safety in Washington, d C. And they're
going to be allowed to do their job properly. The
murder rate in Washington today is higher than that of Bogata, Columbia,
Mexico City. Some of the places that you hear about
(02:00):
as being the worst places on.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Earth's much higher. This is much higher.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
The number of car thefs has doubled over the past
five years, and the number of car jackings has more
than triple murders. And twenty twenty three reached the highest
rate probably ever. They say twenty five years, but they
don't know what that means because it just goes back
twenty five years.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
Can't be worse our capital city.
Speaker 6 (02:25):
One of the great complain violent gangs and the left
throws at Donald Trump obs of is that he's got
a lot of folks from Fox News in his administration. Okay,
guilty is charged every single one of them. I like,
I think they're doing a good job. They understand messaging.
They had careers before Fox News. We don't have to
(02:48):
defend our personnel choices. You put Kamala Harris in the
vice presidential seat, you put old brain dad Popa in
the presidency. You don't get you have lost any high
ground to criticize this president's decisions.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Things are getting done, period.
Speaker 6 (03:10):
So Janine Piro, the top lawman, the new sheriff in
town in Washington, d C. The US attorney. She spoke
at President Trump's press conference where President Trump, in one
fell swoop, managed to tell America, Hey, you're going to
be able to come to the Capitol and feel safe again. Yeah,
(03:30):
I imagine that. Imagine the fact that all across America,
in small town America where they are safe, people wanted
to go to our nation's capital Forrest Gump style, but
they didn't want to get mugged, and they were worried about.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
It, and we couldn't keep you safe in our nation's capital.
Can you imagine?
Speaker 6 (03:48):
And he said, I'm embarrassed by this. We're going to
fix it. Because we can fix it. We don't need
to create structures and blue Ruben committees and stakeholder meaning.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
We're going to fix it.
Speaker 6 (03:59):
We're going to arrest bad guys period into story, and
then we're going to prosecute them and we're gonna throw
them in prison. If they're here illegally, we're going to
kick them out of the country. This isn't hard, folks,
None of this is hard. It's blocking and tackling, so
you has. Attorney Janin Piro spoke at the president's a
press conference where she said she sees too much violent
crime committed by young punks. Yeah, if you're on the internet,
(04:20):
it's all you see.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
I see too much violent crime being committed by young
punks who think that they can get together in gangs
and crews and beat the hell out of you or
anyone else. They don't care where they are. They can
be in DuPont Circle. But they know that we can't
touch them. Why because the laws are weak. I can't
(04:43):
touch you. If you're fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen years old
and you have a gun. I convict someone of shooting
another person with an illegal gun on a public bus
in the chest, intent to kill. I convict him, and
you know what, the judge gets, gives him probation, says
you should go to college. We need to go after
(05:06):
the DC Council and their absurd laws. We need to
get rid of this concept of a no cash fail.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
We need to recognize that.
Speaker 5 (05:15):
The people who matter are the law abiding citizens. And
it starts today, but it's not going to end today
because the President is going to do everything we need
to do to make sure that these emboldened criminals understand
we see you, we're watching you, and we're going to
change the law to catch you. And my final note
(05:36):
is this, these kids understand that the jurisdiction is through
the state Attorney General Brian Schwab. I did a poster
of the young man from Doge who was beaten bloody
with a severe concussion of broken nose, and then I
did a poster of what happens to those kids Because
I can't arrest them, I can't prosecute them. They go
(05:59):
to family Corps and they get to do yoga and
arts and crafts. Enough it changes today.
Speaker 6 (06:09):
It's that simple, folks, It's that simple. You have to
actually want to stop the crime. It's just that simple,
and the Left doesn't want to. Last night, they took
to the streets banging pots and pans. This was the banner.
Go outside tonight at dark and start banging pot. Take
(06:29):
a pot or pan with you, take a spoon, and
bang on it until you bring all your neighbors out
of the house.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
And when they come out wondering.
Speaker 6 (06:37):
What this racket is because you're crazy and you're making
a bunch of noise, you tell them what's going on.
Trump is taking over DC, and we won't have it.
We have the right to live here and get murdered,
mugged rate. We have the right to do this. And
now they tell us, oh, the crime's not bad. Well,
(06:59):
do you remember what Joe Biden said on the floor
of the Senate.
Speaker 7 (07:03):
Driving home, my staff, who lives here in the hill,
reminded me, don't stop at a stop light until I'm
out of town. If I see a red light late
at night, since it's very low, traffic slow up at
the other block. So I never come to a full
stop except in the middle of the block because of
car jackets stopping the light, people standing in the corner
(07:26):
walking up with a gun.
Speaker 6 (07:28):
If the people committing the crimes in Washington, d C.
Were white, we would have sent them all to prison.
But they don't want to send them to prison because
they're black, and blacks are owned by the Democrat part.
They are owned, their votes are owned because they give
them welfare, they keep them out of prison, and they
(07:50):
own them.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
They've become pets for them to keep and that is
exactly what they do.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
From the King of ding It and this other guy,
Michael Barry, these you're the kind.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Of guys you're like to smacking airs. Yes, a little
King George on your drive home.
Speaker 6 (08:10):
For those of you listening on old fashioned terrestrial radio, ever,
stop and think about the fact that we're using almost
without amendment, without modification, the same technology that you're great
perhaps great great grandfather used.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Think about that.
Speaker 6 (08:34):
The only thing that has changed if you are driving
and listening right now, it might even be on the
same station that you're great or even great great grandfather
listened on one hundred years ago. The only thing that
changed between now and then is the quality of the
broadcast you're getting. Because back then, the legends would get
(08:59):
on the radio. That was the basis of the Grand
Ole opry. They would get on the radio and sing
to you live. Now, you got some dude in Houston
just screaming and hollering, and you don't know any better.
You think it's good. Back in those days, we were
a real country. Yeah, And as time went on, you'd
(09:23):
have Pee Wee Jones and little Jimmy Dickens singing to
you on the radio.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Oh, it was a glorious thing, Bill Monroe.
Speaker 6 (09:31):
Yes, Indeed, Earl Scruggs would be picking into grinning Grandpa
Jones there with him. Earl Scruggs picking Grandpa plunking as
they say, Old Kitty Wells, Kitty Wells would be singing
her retort to the I don't think God made honky
tonk Angels. Kitty Wells would be singing a response. I mean,
(09:52):
what a time to be alive, friends, when the biggest
song on the radio is about honky tonk angels and
all the women at home feeling unempowered because they didn't
work outside the home. If they did, they were just
a secretary. They couldn't do anything else. It was the
only option. Or a teacher maybe. And there goes Kitty Wells,
(10:16):
she blasts onto the radio before Loretta Lynn was Loretta Lynn,
and she sings her own song in defense of the women.
I love the women, the prefeminist women who were let's
not call them feminists who were defenders of their sex.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
I love those ladies.
Speaker 6 (10:39):
Kitty Wells, Loretta Lynn. They were strong. They were strong ladies,
make no mistake about it. Do you know why, Because
just like blacks before the nonsense we lived through now,
there was a time when it was hard as hell
to be black in this country. You couldn't get a job,
(11:02):
it was hard to get into school.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
It's hard to get a job in the private sector.
Speaker 6 (11:07):
So you might be three times smarter than the other
people sorting mail at the mail at the post office.
That was the only job you could get. And you
would find people who lived through that bone crushing, soul crushing,
demoralizing glass ceiling. But out of that came such a strength,
(11:31):
such an inner strength. Women before there were the opportunities
that are available now, Blacks before there were the opportunities
that were available now. Oh boy, those people were strong,
and they would be embarrassed of what passes for feminism now,
these angry women with hairy legs defending men who want
(11:55):
to be women. You know, there was a time that
women fought to be taken seriously to have women's tennis,
for instance, be as good as men's tennis or as
close as it could be. And that was Martina and
Chris Evertt and Billy Jean King and then and then.
Speaker 1 (12:20):
Somewhere along the way.
Speaker 6 (12:23):
They got confused and they picked the wrong side of
the bridge. And now they find themselves the same women
having to defend men taking their positions used to women
would boldly announce, can't know men come into women's sports.
(12:44):
This is our domain. You don't have to watch it,
you don't have to like it. You can make jokes
about it, and you can tell us to go make
you a sandwich. Well, by god, we've got our own
sports arena and you're not going to take it from us.
Now you've got women who occupy that position that used
to be in the as late as the seventies and
even into the eighties, strong women standing up for women.
(13:09):
Now you've got them doing the most anti women thing possible,
and that is saying, yeah, a grown man can take
our position and beat us in our own sports. So
you got Riley Gaines out there making the brilliant point.
You know why Riley Gaines is so popular, same reason
Sidney Sweeney is Sidney's Wheney's not the prettiest woman alive.
(13:32):
I mean, Ramon wouldn't kick her out of bed. Ramone
was singing, Barbara mandrels, you can eat crackers in my
bed anytime earlier. And I said, what, Ramon, what are
you talking about? He said, I'm that's dedicating that to
Sidney Sweeney. I said, I'll be down. I said, you're
gonna do a George Jones Barbara Mandrel special peanuts. I
was country when country wasn't cool. You're quoting Barbara Mandreu.
(13:54):
I didn't know who he knew who Barbara Mandreel was.
I asked him who the two sisters were, but that
bogged him. Now I showed him a picture of Louise.
He got he really liked Louise. Anyway, was it Tina Marie?
Speaker 7 (14:06):
Was that? Yep?
Speaker 1 (14:06):
Tina Marie? Uh huh.
Speaker 6 (14:08):
Anyway, there was a time where women stood up for women.
Now women have been so divided by the left. Don't
even realize it. They've been so divided by the left
that they got themselves into such contorted, into such a
pretzel that now they're defending men taking their titles from them.
(14:32):
So now women can't win their own sports. It's a
biological fact and we're going to talk science here in
just a moment with a with a science fell I
never met him before, but uh, he's a meteorologist and
he's been called a climate climate science denier, and he
says he's not.
Speaker 1 (14:51):
But I am. I'm a client science. I'm a I'm a.
Speaker 6 (14:53):
Global warming denier. I'm a global warming denier. I don't
believe the vaccine is a vaccine. I think it's deadly.
I think the vaccine industry is an absolute scam. I
think our food is poisoned. I think Bill Gates is
the devil. I think women are women and men or men,
and any man it wants to act like he's a
woman and play in women's sports is a nut job.
I think their mental health cases. Yeah, I got some
(15:16):
more opinions. We've got time.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
The Michael Berry.
Speaker 6 (15:19):
Show TV was once called a vast wasteland. It was
a place that parents would park their kids so they
wouldn't have to raise them, wouldn't have to spend any
time with them.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
Wasn't anything wrong with that.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
I spent a lot of.
Speaker 6 (15:34):
Time sitting on a bean bag watching Saturday morning cartoons,
and I'm the better for it.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
I'll be honest, with you.
Speaker 6 (15:41):
But then we got these phones, and then the phone
became a way to text your friends lols and fo
rofl and whatever else. And then there was that nonsense
and vapid conversation. And then we started social media, and
somewhere along the way Twitter, Twitter popped into our world.
And for all the time talk about how stupid and
(16:01):
vapid and horrible and time consuming it is. I'll be
completely honest, I am better at entertaining and engaging you
because of the amount of time I spend on Twitter.
I hope it's not too much, but it is the
best place that I find the words, ideas, thoughts, commentary, quotes,
(16:22):
interviews of people that I would otherwise never come across,
and I get to share their unvarnished opinion that they
put out to the world. One such fellows by the
name of Chris Martz. He is best I can tell
a weatherman in Berryville, Virginia. I guess we'll find out
in just a moment. But I've been following this guy
for a while. While I wouldn't say I was stalking,
(16:43):
I did not say stalking wrong. I said I wouldn't
say I was stalking. But I've been trying to get
his attention, wearing him out with emails because this guy
is just throwing the heat with facts about global warming. Now,
global warming is not technically in the news today as
the story, but we can't put this pun intended on
the back burner. Global warming and everything that was done
(17:07):
by the left, at the Chinese direction, at George Soros's direction,
at some nonprofits direction, has has handcuffed our economy and
hurt your life and made things more expensive. So let's
talk about the science. I'm not prepared to talk about
science because I'm not smart enough to, but this fella
is I've been reading him for a while and his
stuff is fantastic. Chris Marx, would you like an intro song?
(17:31):
Do you have like a walk up song like in baseball?
Is there something that would be, you know, inner Sandman
or something.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
That's fine?
Speaker 4 (17:39):
I don't care.
Speaker 6 (17:41):
I mean, if you have a good walk up song,
we'll do that. Chris Marx is our guest. Welcome to
the program. I really I'm glad to have you on.
I'm a big fan of what you write. I think
you're doing great work. And my original reason for reaching
out to you as I did was to tell you
there are people out here that you will never meet
that are reading what you were saying and tweeting it
and trying to amplify your message because it is based
(18:04):
in science, actual science, and your expertise in your experience.
And I think there are a lot of people who
share your opinion who don't have the stones to speak
out as you do. So let me start by saying
thank you for the good work you do. It's a
real ministry.
Speaker 4 (18:20):
Thanks for having me on. I appreciate being here.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
So let's just go down the list you posted a
week ago.
Speaker 6 (18:27):
Some people constantly criticize you because you don't say what
they've been told and have dutifully repeated. And you force
people to think anew about subjects they don't want to consider,
and that makes them uncomfortable, so they insult you.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
And you said.
Speaker 6 (18:41):
Quote you don't understand because you don't read. I am
not a climate change denier.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
What are you?
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Well, Michael, I consider myself to be a lukewarmer, and
that's somewhere between a climate alarmist and someone who is
a quote unquote denier. So I'm kind of a mum.
The position that carbonate change global warming gets real, and
there is an anthropogenic element to it to some extent.
Speaker 4 (19:09):
But this idea that.
Speaker 3 (19:10):
We are facing a climate crisis is just simply scientifically
unsupportable by any relevant data metric. So basically we know
from instrumental temperature data that's aggregated into area weighted averaging,
and obviously there's a lot of uncertainty as to precisely
how much. There's about a thirty percent divergence in the
(19:31):
data sets that we have of the instrumental service temperature data,
but the planet has warned by about a degree celsius
one point two degree celsius since eighteen fifty, and all
else being equal, adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere should
cause some warming, and obviously the increase in COO too.
Speaker 4 (19:50):
We've increased the concentration.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
By about fifty one percent, which is a halfway of
doubling from the pre industrial level since eighteen fifty, and
so global warming theory maintains that if you increase the
CO two level, you double its that increases or enhances
rather the Earth's natural greenhouse effects by about one and
a half percent.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
So we reduce.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
The UH the emission of long wave radiation to space
by about three point seven watts per square meter, and
there's a point there's a point eight.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Walk per square meter difference on that. Now, for the.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
Average listener, a lot is a is a measure of
dules per seconds amount of power, and the standardized per
unit of area measuring one square meter. So that's just
a flux, a radiation fluck for the to break down
the technical terms of that, But how much warming actually
results from doubling That depends on amplifying or dampening feedback
(20:48):
mechanisms which take in as a response to a change
in that forcing of CO two. And so if it
is called the equilibrium climate sensitivity, and the IPCC's best
estimate of that is about three degrees celsius, So that's
the temperature change in response to doubling CO two, but
a lot of that and it's a lot of recent
(21:09):
estimate suggests it's less than that. And if that's the case,
and that means that the climate system is not as
sensitive to our CO two emissions and other greenhouse gases
as they claim. And the other problem with really truly detecting.
Speaker 4 (21:23):
An anthoburgenic impact on the.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
Climate is that are the energy imbalance Earth energy imbalance
which causes a temperature change must be an end of
the nearest tens level lot per square meter. And yet
the energy imbalance that we have has a sixty six
times larger uncertainty than the detection limits. So it very
(21:48):
much could be that most of the warmon we have
seen globally since say nineteen fifty, because that's really when
CO two emissions began to take off. It really could
be mostly natural or it could be mostly anthrobergenic, and
we simply don't know. My point really is that in
terms of whether or not how to say crisis does
(22:08):
not depend on whether or not it's the exact calls,
because you can look at the number of deaths from
whether related disasters and our ability to adapt and overcome
the adversity of nature throws at us have resulted in
ninety six percent reduction and the absolute number of deaths
not even standardized per capita, but the absolute number of
(22:29):
deaths despite a six billion population, six billion person increase
in population since nineteen twenty, and then the number of
people that are malnourished is at a record low. The
cropiolds are at an all time record high, and that
also goes to crop production and then you look at
the share of the world living in poverty as an
all time record low.
Speaker 4 (22:50):
So the human condition.
Speaker 3 (22:52):
The state of our welfare has never been better than
it is today. Even with climate change projections, it's expected
to only improved by the end of the century.
Speaker 6 (23:04):
I don't want to get you out of your lane
because you have been very careful to focus on science.
But you get called basically an idiot for having opinions
based purely on science that you can defend based on science.
Speaker 1 (23:21):
Why do you think that is? Why do you think
I mean, I have my own opinions, but.
Speaker 6 (23:26):
This this doesn't seem to be an organic, an organic movement.
It feels like it has nefarious underpinnings your thoughts.
Speaker 3 (23:38):
Well, absolutely, and when they put the work of the
name calling and adammin of the pat it's just the
fine that they have lost for debate.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Chris, I have to go up now.
Speaker 6 (23:48):
I messed this line up. Hold on rub against the
break one moment. Chris Marks is our guest. You can
find him on Twitter's fantastic. They remain scared the death
of you, and they remain scared to death of truth.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Michael Show going anywhere, even if Trump does you're not, yes,
is Chris Marks?
Speaker 6 (24:06):
He is, Uh, We're going to learn more about him,
but he has some very interesting perspectives on global warming.
I've been following him for a while, and as I
often do when I respect someone in their work, I
reach out and say, hey, can you come on and
talk to me and a whole lot of my friends
about what you're talking about. Okay, so we're talking about
the underpinnings that backing the real impetus and genesis behind
(24:28):
the global warming movement.
Speaker 1 (24:29):
I had to cut you off, so good.
Speaker 4 (24:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
So back in the nineteen eighties, we really got a
hold of the ozone ozone scared that we had, and
so that I'm signing the Montreal Protocol and the chloafloacarbons
that you know, led to the allegedly led to the
depletion of ozone and stratosphere.
Speaker 4 (24:52):
And the next big.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
Thing on their list of priorities to tackle the United Nations,
that says, was the carbon dioxide emissions. And they really
wanted to regulate COO two emissions in the context of
this new emerging issue at the time, and we're talking
about nineteen eighty seven, nineteen eighty eight, of this global
warming movement, and this was really instigated by the likes
(25:13):
of NASA's doctor James Hansen. He was at their daughter
Institute for Space Studies for many years.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
And then, of course, I.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
Think then Senator Al Gore, who of course became our
vice president and kind of the political face of the
climate change movement really for the longest time until the
course CRETA somewhere came along. But in the nineteen eighties,
the United Nations really had this kind of policy goal
to regulate CO two emissions because this was the way
that they could really kind of control it, have leverage
(25:43):
over energy companies and manufacturing industry, and so they kind
of had the policy car ahead of the scientific course,
and they were really looking for to when they formed
the UN Environment Program and of course in nineteen ninety
the inter Governmental Panel and Climate Change the IPCC, they
had this kind of policy goal to regulate these emissions,
and they wanted to find They wanted to bank Royal
(26:04):
scientists to have science that supported that policy agenda, and
so it was decided virtually a decade ago that almost
all scientific research will be funded by the federal government,
and that's of course allocated in a portion through Congress each year,
through the research and development funds. And when we decided
to put politicians and therefore policy goals in charge of
(26:27):
that research funding, then we really made science captive of
a political agenda. And this is something that Dwight President
Dwight D. Eisenhower warned could happen and warned against that.
They devised it against going down this route, and is
nineteen sixty one Farewell Address. And now and now we
have an army of scientists, these foot soldiers, whose careers
(26:47):
their success in academia in order to secure tenure at university,
in order to get accolades at these prestigious organizations like
AMS and the American Geophysical Union and the Royal Society,
their careers depend on the government and being concerned enough
about climate change and an environment environmental issues to continue
(27:08):
to put money towards their research so that they can
have successful careers. And when you put when you when
you have this kind of conflict of interest, it really
degrades the quality of science and calls into question of
modis behind it. And this is interesting because I'm often
accused of being a you know, funded for by the
fossil fuel industry, which isn't true, but and and that
(27:29):
would be a conflict of interest potentially when it comes
to conducting research. But they never mentioned the fact that
a lot of these organizations like Climate Central and the
World Weather Attribution, which blame climate change on extreme weather events,
and they cherry pick charts and data to show in
cases when you look at the full Bitta Setter's no increase.
These organizations are bankrolled by environmental groups and a lot
(27:50):
of organizations that donate to advocate for left wing calls,
is like planned A Parenthood and of course Dajor donators
and family trusts that donate to the Democratic Party. So
that's definitely a conflict of interest there. And the government
funding the political aspirations behind some of these policies and
the science that needs to support them, they're a conflict
of interest. So it's when what people always look at,
(28:12):
you know, all the the deniers, the skeptics are funded
by a.
Speaker 4 (28:15):
Big oil Well, there's conflict of interest everywhere, and you
got to be careful. But so that's something that they
never want to address.
Speaker 6 (28:24):
No, And you know, I think if if a conflict
of interest or potential conflict of interest is disclosed up front.
I think that's very important. You know, It's like when
a witness goes on the stand. I start a life
as a lawyer. As long as we understand, you know
who's paying this quote unquote expert witness, because that very
(28:44):
likely colors what they're doing. We'll still listen to what
they have to say, but we do deserve to know that,
and then from there we can have the conversation.
Speaker 1 (28:52):
So many people that do what you do, but from the.
Speaker 6 (28:54):
Other side, that is, argue this issue and they're being
paid by particular interests and don't disclose it. I find
that to be disingenuous and very disturbing, particularly when it
comes from external agents of the United States whose interest
is in slowing down our fossil fuel production and dominance
on that subject. I am of the opinion that the
(29:19):
burning of several thousand year old dinosaur bones as an
energy source is insanely efficient and it makes our quality
of life a lot better at a very low cost,
with minimal damage to the environment. And it's damage I'm
willing to sustain for the improvement and quality of life.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
Your thought, well, I've always been of the opinion because
I kind of be as objective as possible when we
all have biases. I have biases. Everybody has bias. Every
scientist has biases, whether he or she admits it or not.
But I don't really care where our energy comes from
that we use to power modern civilization, so long as
(29:59):
it is one affordable for the working class and low
income families, two it's sustainable, and three it's efficient. So
those are free criteria that I have for energy sources.
It could come from very farts for all I care,
and I don't care. But when you've forced expensive and unreliable,
intermittent energy on people, it makes their quality of it
(30:20):
lowers their quality of life, and that's not something that
we should be aiming for.
Speaker 4 (30:23):
That's not progress.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
And a lot of the renewable energy technologies, primarily utility
scale wind and utility scale solar, do not fit the
description of a sustainable, cost efficient energy source because when
they are added to the grid, they don't replace fossil fuels.
They have extreme high land requirements and that of course
(30:45):
increases property taxes. They have load balancing costs for their
intermittency because they're at least efficient energy sources, and all
of those once they're factored in to the generation costs
actually make them more expensive than any other technology, any
fossil fuel technology, and more expensive than.
Speaker 4 (31:00):
Even nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
And fossil fields have provided for our way of life
for well over.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
One hundred and seventy five years, and they have.
Speaker 3 (31:08):
Lifted millions, probably billions of people from poverty. They have
the technologies that have emerged as a result of us
using them, has doubled the average of life expectancy in
every inhabited continent, including Africa, since eighteen since the eighteen fifties,
and it has provided for warning coordination systems that alert
us when extreme weather A buns are coming. If we
(31:28):
didn't have fossil fields power in the grid, we wouldn't
have the Wi Fi connections to connect us to the
Internet to stay in touch with the National Weather Service
alerts and a hurricane from spailing up the coast and
so on. Winds simply cannot pick up the demand to
meet it. Cannot simply cannot fill that gap to meet
the demand if we were to take fossil fuels off
one now, solar power does have a future. People put
(31:49):
it on our roofs in their houses, and people put
it and it should be put on like the roofs
are put on canopies that covered parking lots for shade protection,
to generate electricity, but to destroy tens of thousands of
eight is a land wilderness in the ecosystems, farmers, biodiversity,
which of course is the difference in different plants and
animals that live in are in an area, in an
(32:09):
ecosystem and a habitat. That's not that's counterproductive to progress
on both the environment and.
Speaker 4 (32:14):
Of course our state of welfare.
Speaker 3 (32:16):
If we really really want to reduce our dependence on
fossil fuels, and of course we're still going to need
to oil for as long as you know, in control
of combustion engines remain profitable because a lot of people
are still going to refuse to buy electric cars because
they cannot get them to go, you know, nine hundred
miles in the winter time on along road trip to
visit family.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
But we're still good. But if you want to really
reduce our dependence on.
Speaker 3 (32:38):
The coal and natural gas, and natural gas is largely
replaced coal in many parts of the world, especially that
the United States, we should be training into nuclear power
and nuclear fission because it is a is the most
carbon free energy source. It's the safest energy source on
a desk of caroline hour basis, only behind solar
Luck and load down. Michael Very Show is on the air.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
All right, Clinton, you called down the thunder, Well, now.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
You've got it. You see that it says United States Marshall.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
Don't kill me.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Take a good look at him, Mike, because that's how
you're gonna hand on.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
The cowboys are finished. Do you understand me? I see
a red sass, I kill.
Speaker 4 (00:33):
My man wearing it?
Speaker 5 (00:35):
So run, cur Bred, Come all the other curves alive comming?
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Do you tell them I'm coming? And Hell's comment with me,
your heir.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
Hell comment with that very serious, very for some of
thing's out of control, but we're gonna put it in
control very quickly, like we did.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
On the southern border.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
I'm announcing a historic action to rest, thank you, our
nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam, and squalor and worse.
This is Liberation Day in DC, and we're going to
take our capital back. We're taking it back under the
authorities vested in me as the President of the United States.
(01:16):
I'm officially invoking Section seventy forty of the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act, you know what that is, and
placing the DC Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control,
and you'll be meeting the people that will be directly
involved with that. Very good people, but they're tough and
(01:39):
they know what's happening, and they're better be In addition,
I'm deploying the National Guard to help re establish law
order of public safety in Washington, d C. And they're
going to be allowed to do their job properly. The
murder rate in Washington today is higher than that of Bogata, Columbia,
Mexico City. Some of the places that you hear about
(02:00):
as being the worst places on.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Earth's much higher. This is much higher.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
The number of car thefs has doubled over the past
five years, and the number of car jackings has more
than triple murders. And twenty twenty three reached the highest
rate probably ever. They say twenty five years, but they
don't know what that means because it just goes back
twenty five years.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
Can't be worse our capital city.
Speaker 6 (02:25):
One of the great complain violent gangs and the left
throws at Donald Trump obs of is that he's got
a lot of folks from Fox News in his administration. Okay,
guilty is charged every single one of them. I like,
I think they're doing a good job. They understand messaging.
They had careers before Fox News. We don't have to
(02:48):
defend our personnel choices. You put Kamala Harris in the
vice presidential seat, you put old brain dad Popa in
the presidency. You don't get you have lost any high
ground to criticize this president's decisions.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Things are getting done, period.
Speaker 6 (03:10):
So Janine Piro, the top lawman, the new sheriff in
town in Washington, d C. The US attorney. She spoke
at President Trump's press conference where President Trump, in one
fell swoop, managed to tell America, Hey, you're going to
be able to come to the Capitol and feel safe again. Yeah,
(03:30):
I imagine that. Imagine the fact that all across America,
in small town America where they are safe, people wanted
to go to our nation's capital Forrest Gump style, but
they didn't want to get mugged, and they were worried about.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
It, and we couldn't keep you safe in our nation's capital.
Can you imagine?
Speaker 6 (03:48):
And he said, I'm embarrassed by this. We're going to
fix it. Because we can fix it. We don't need
to create structures and blue Ruben committees and stakeholder meaning.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
We're going to fix it.
Speaker 6 (03:59):
We're going to arrest bad guys period into story, and
then we're going to prosecute them and we're gonna throw
them in prison. If they're here illegally, we're going to
kick them out of the country. This isn't hard, folks,
None of this is hard. It's blocking and tackling, so
you has. Attorney Janin Piro spoke at the president's a
press conference where she said she sees too much violent
crime committed by young punks. Yeah, if you're on the internet,
(04:20):
it's all you see.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
I see too much violent crime being committed by young
punks who think that they can get together in gangs
and crews and beat the hell out of you or
anyone else. They don't care where they are. They can
be in DuPont Circle. But they know that we can't
touch them. Why because the laws are weak. I can't
(04:43):
touch you. If you're fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen years old
and you have a gun. I convict someone of shooting
another person with an illegal gun on a public bus
in the chest, intent to kill. I convict him, and
you know what, the judge gets, gives him probation, says
you should go to college. We need to go after
(05:06):
the DC Council and their absurd laws. We need to
get rid of this concept of a no cash fail.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
We need to recognize that.
Speaker 5 (05:15):
The people who matter are the law abiding citizens. And
it starts today, but it's not going to end today
because the President is going to do everything we need
to do to make sure that these emboldened criminals understand
we see you, we're watching you, and we're going to
change the law to catch you. And my final note
(05:36):
is this, these kids understand that the jurisdiction is through
the state Attorney General Brian Schwab. I did a poster
of the young man from Doge who was beaten bloody
with a severe concussion of broken nose, and then I
did a poster of what happens to those kids Because
I can't arrest them, I can't prosecute them. They go
(05:59):
to family Corps and they get to do yoga and
arts and crafts. Enough it changes today.
Speaker 6 (06:09):
It's that simple, folks, It's that simple. You have to
actually want to stop the crime. It's just that simple,
and the Left doesn't want to. Last night, they took
to the streets banging pots and pans. This was the banner.
Go outside tonight at dark and start banging pot. Take
(06:29):
a pot or pan with you, take a spoon, and
bang on it until you bring all your neighbors out
of the house.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
And when they come out wondering.
Speaker 6 (06:37):
What this racket is because you're crazy and you're making
a bunch of noise, you tell them what's going on.
Trump is taking over DC, and we won't have it.
We have the right to live here and get murdered,
mugged rate. We have the right to do this. And
now they tell us, oh, the crime's not bad. Well,
(06:59):
do you remember what Joe Biden said on the floor
of the Senate.
Speaker 7 (07:03):
Driving home, my staff, who lives here in the hill,
reminded me, don't stop at a stop light until I'm
out of town. If I see a red light late
at night, since it's very low, traffic slow up at
the other block. So I never come to a full
stop except in the middle of the block because of
car jackets stopping the light, people standing in the corner
(07:26):
walking up with a gun.
Speaker 6 (07:28):
If the people committing the crimes in Washington, d C.
Were white, we would have sent them all to prison.
But they don't want to send them to prison because
they're black, and blacks are owned by the Democrat part.
They are owned, their votes are owned because they give
them welfare, they keep them out of prison, and they
(07:50):
own them.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
They've become pets for them to keep and that is
exactly what they do.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
From the King of ding It and this other guy,
Michael Barry, these you're the kind.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Of guys you're like to smacking airs. Yes, a little
King George on your drive home.
Speaker 6 (08:10):
For those of you listening on old fashioned terrestrial radio, ever,
stop and think about the fact that we're using almost
without amendment, without modification, the same technology that you're great
perhaps great great grandfather used.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Think about that.
Speaker 6 (08:34):
The only thing that has changed if you are driving
and listening right now, it might even be on the
same station that you're great or even great great grandfather
listened on one hundred years ago. The only thing that
changed between now and then is the quality of the
broadcast you're getting. Because back then, the legends would get
(08:59):
on the radio. That was the basis of the Grand
Ole opry. They would get on the radio and sing
to you live. Now, you got some dude in Houston
just screaming and hollering, and you don't know any better.
You think it's good. Back in those days, we were
a real country. Yeah, And as time went on, you'd
(09:23):
have Pee Wee Jones and little Jimmy Dickens singing to
you on the radio.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Oh, it was a glorious thing, Bill Monroe.
Speaker 6 (09:31):
Yes, Indeed, Earl Scruggs would be picking into grinning Grandpa
Jones there with him. Earl Scruggs picking Grandpa plunking as
they say, Old Kitty Wells, Kitty Wells would be singing
her retort to the I don't think God made honky
tonk Angels. Kitty Wells would be singing a response. I mean,
(09:52):
what a time to be alive, friends, when the biggest
song on the radio is about honky tonk angels and
all the women at home feeling unempowered because they didn't
work outside the home. If they did, they were just
a secretary. They couldn't do anything else. It was the
only option. Or a teacher maybe. And there goes Kitty Wells,
(10:16):
she blasts onto the radio before Loretta Lynn was Loretta Lynn,
and she sings her own song in defense of the women.
I love the women, the prefeminist women who were let's
not call them feminists who were defenders of their sex.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
I love those ladies.
Speaker 6 (10:39):
Kitty Wells, Loretta Lynn. They were strong. They were strong ladies,
make no mistake about it. Do you know why, Because
just like blacks before the nonsense we lived through now,
there was a time when it was hard as hell
to be black in this country. You couldn't get a job,
(11:02):
it was hard to get into school.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
It's hard to get a job in the private sector.
Speaker 6 (11:07):
So you might be three times smarter than the other
people sorting mail at the mail at the post office.
That was the only job you could get. And you
would find people who lived through that bone crushing, soul crushing,
demoralizing glass ceiling. But out of that came such a strength,
(11:31):
such an inner strength. Women before there were the opportunities
that are available now, Blacks before there were the opportunities
that were available now. Oh boy, those people were strong,
and they would be embarrassed of what passes for feminism now,
these angry women with hairy legs defending men who want
(11:55):
to be women. You know, there was a time that
women fought to be taken seriously to have women's tennis,
for instance, be as good as men's tennis or as
close as it could be. And that was Martina and
Chris Evertt and Billy Jean King and then and then.
Speaker 1 (12:20):
Somewhere along the way.
Speaker 6 (12:23):
They got confused and they picked the wrong side of
the bridge. And now they find themselves the same women
having to defend men taking their positions used to women
would boldly announce, can't know men come into women's sports.
(12:44):
This is our domain. You don't have to watch it,
you don't have to like it. You can make jokes
about it, and you can tell us to go make
you a sandwich. Well, by god, we've got our own
sports arena and you're not going to take it from us.
Now you've got women who occupy that position that used
to be in the as late as the seventies and
even into the eighties, strong women standing up for women.
(13:09):
Now you've got them doing the most anti women thing possible,
and that is saying, yeah, a grown man can take
our position and beat us in our own sports. So
you got Riley Gaines out there making the brilliant point.
You know why Riley Gaines is so popular, same reason
Sidney Sweeney is Sidney's Wheney's not the prettiest woman alive.
(13:32):
I mean, Ramon wouldn't kick her out of bed. Ramone
was singing, Barbara mandrels, you can eat crackers in my
bed anytime earlier. And I said, what, Ramon, what are
you talking about? He said, I'm that's dedicating that to
Sidney Sweeney. I said, I'll be down. I said, you're
gonna do a George Jones Barbara Mandrel special peanuts. I
was country when country wasn't cool. You're quoting Barbara Mandreu.
(13:54):
I didn't know who he knew who Barbara Mandreel was.
I asked him who the two sisters were, but that
bogged him. Now I showed him a picture of Louise.
He got he really liked Louise. Anyway, was it Tina Marie?
Speaker 7 (14:06):
Was that? Yep?
Speaker 1 (14:06):
Tina Marie? Uh huh.
Speaker 6 (14:08):
Anyway, there was a time where women stood up for women.
Now women have been so divided by the left. Don't
even realize it. They've been so divided by the left
that they got themselves into such contorted, into such a
pretzel that now they're defending men taking their titles from them.
(14:32):
So now women can't win their own sports. It's a
biological fact and we're going to talk science here in
just a moment with a with a science fell I
never met him before, but uh, he's a meteorologist and
he's been called a climate climate science denier, and he
says he's not.
Speaker 1 (14:51):
But I am. I'm a client science. I'm a I'm a.
Speaker 6 (14:53):
Global warming denier. I'm a global warming denier. I don't
believe the vaccine is a vaccine. I think it's deadly.
I think the vaccine industry is an absolute scam. I
think our food is poisoned. I think Bill Gates is
the devil. I think women are women and men or men,
and any man it wants to act like he's a
woman and play in women's sports is a nut job.
I think their mental health cases. Yeah, I got some
(15:16):
more opinions. We've got time.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
The Michael Berry.
Speaker 6 (15:19):
Show TV was once called a vast wasteland. It was
a place that parents would park their kids so they
wouldn't have to raise them, wouldn't have to spend any
time with them.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
Wasn't anything wrong with that.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
I spent a lot of.
Speaker 6 (15:34):
Time sitting on a bean bag watching Saturday morning cartoons,
and I'm the better for it.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
I'll be honest, with you.
Speaker 6 (15:41):
But then we got these phones, and then the phone
became a way to text your friends lols and fo
rofl and whatever else. And then there was that nonsense
and vapid conversation. And then we started social media, and
somewhere along the way Twitter, Twitter popped into our world.
And for all the time talk about how stupid and
(16:01):
vapid and horrible and time consuming it is. I'll be
completely honest, I am better at entertaining and engaging you
because of the amount of time I spend on Twitter.
I hope it's not too much, but it is the
best place that I find the words, ideas, thoughts, commentary, quotes,
(16:22):
interviews of people that I would otherwise never come across,
and I get to share their unvarnished opinion that they
put out to the world. One such fellows by the
name of Chris Martz. He is best I can tell
a weatherman in Berryville, Virginia. I guess we'll find out
in just a moment. But I've been following this guy
for a while. While I wouldn't say I was stalking,
(16:43):
I did not say stalking wrong. I said I wouldn't
say I was stalking. But I've been trying to get
his attention, wearing him out with emails because this guy
is just throwing the heat with facts about global warming. Now,
global warming is not technically in the news today as
the story, but we can't put this pun intended on
the back burner. Global warming and everything that was done
(17:07):
by the left, at the Chinese direction, at George Soros's direction,
at some nonprofits direction, has has handcuffed our economy and
hurt your life and made things more expensive. So let's
talk about the science. I'm not prepared to talk about
science because I'm not smart enough to, but this fella
is I've been reading him for a while and his
stuff is fantastic. Chris Marx, would you like an intro song?
(17:31):
Do you have like a walk up song like in baseball?
Is there something that would be, you know, inner Sandman
or something.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
That's fine?
Speaker 4 (17:39):
I don't care.
Speaker 6 (17:41):
I mean, if you have a good walk up song,
we'll do that. Chris Marx is our guest. Welcome to
the program. I really I'm glad to have you on.
I'm a big fan of what you write. I think
you're doing great work. And my original reason for reaching
out to you as I did was to tell you
there are people out here that you will never meet
that are reading what you were saying and tweeting it
and trying to amplify your message because it is based
(18:04):
in science, actual science, and your expertise in your experience.
And I think there are a lot of people who
share your opinion who don't have the stones to speak
out as you do. So let me start by saying
thank you for the good work you do. It's a
real ministry.
Speaker 4 (18:20):
Thanks for having me on. I appreciate being here.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
So let's just go down the list you posted a
week ago.
Speaker 6 (18:27):
Some people constantly criticize you because you don't say what
they've been told and have dutifully repeated. And you force
people to think anew about subjects they don't want to consider,
and that makes them uncomfortable, so they insult you.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
And you said.
Speaker 6 (18:41):
Quote you don't understand because you don't read. I am
not a climate change denier.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
What are you?
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Well, Michael, I consider myself to be a lukewarmer, and
that's somewhere between a climate alarmist and someone who is
a quote unquote denier. So I'm kind of a mum.
The position that carbonate change global warming gets real, and
there is an anthropogenic element to it to some extent.
Speaker 4 (19:09):
But this idea that.
Speaker 3 (19:10):
We are facing a climate crisis is just simply scientifically
unsupportable by any relevant data metric. So basically we know
from instrumental temperature data that's aggregated into area weighted averaging,
and obviously there's a lot of uncertainty as to precisely
how much. There's about a thirty percent divergence in the
(19:31):
data sets that we have of the instrumental service temperature data,
but the planet has warned by about a degree celsius
one point two degree celsius since eighteen fifty, and all
else being equal, adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere should
cause some warming, and obviously the increase in COO too.
Speaker 4 (19:50):
We've increased the concentration.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
By about fifty one percent, which is a halfway of
doubling from the pre industrial level since eighteen fifty, and
so global warming theory maintains that if you increase the
CO two level, you double its that increases or enhances
rather the Earth's natural greenhouse effects by about one and
a half percent.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
So we reduce.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
The UH the emission of long wave radiation to space
by about three point seven watts per square meter, and
there's a point there's a point eight.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Walk per square meter difference on that. Now, for the.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
Average listener, a lot is a is a measure of
dules per seconds amount of power, and the standardized per
unit of area measuring one square meter. So that's just
a flux, a radiation fluck for the to break down
the technical terms of that, But how much warming actually
results from doubling That depends on amplifying or dampening feedback
(20:48):
mechanisms which take in as a response to a change
in that forcing of CO two. And so if it
is called the equilibrium climate sensitivity, and the IPCC's best
estimate of that is about three degrees celsius, So that's
the temperature change in response to doubling CO two, but
a lot of that and it's a lot of recent
(21:09):
estimate suggests it's less than that. And if that's the case,
and that means that the climate system is not as
sensitive to our CO two emissions and other greenhouse gases
as they claim. And the other problem with really truly detecting.
Speaker 4 (21:23):
An anthoburgenic impact on the.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
Climate is that are the energy imbalance Earth energy imbalance
which causes a temperature change must be an end of
the nearest tens level lot per square meter. And yet
the energy imbalance that we have has a sixty six
times larger uncertainty than the detection limits. So it very
(21:48):
much could be that most of the warmon we have
seen globally since say nineteen fifty, because that's really when
CO two emissions began to take off. It really could
be mostly natural or it could be mostly anthrobergenic, and
we simply don't know. My point really is that in
terms of whether or not how to say crisis does
(22:08):
not depend on whether or not it's the exact calls,
because you can look at the number of deaths from
whether related disasters and our ability to adapt and overcome
the adversity of nature throws at us have resulted in
ninety six percent reduction and the absolute number of deaths
not even standardized per capita, but the absolute number of
(22:29):
deaths despite a six billion population, six billion person increase
in population since nineteen twenty, and then the number of
people that are malnourished is at a record low. The
cropiolds are at an all time record high, and that
also goes to crop production and then you look at
the share of the world living in poverty as an
all time record low.
Speaker 4 (22:50):
So the human condition.
Speaker 3 (22:52):
The state of our welfare has never been better than
it is today. Even with climate change projections, it's expected
to only improved by the end of the century.
Speaker 6 (23:04):
I don't want to get you out of your lane
because you have been very careful to focus on science.
But you get called basically an idiot for having opinions
based purely on science that you can defend based on science.
Speaker 1 (23:21):
Why do you think that is? Why do you think
I mean, I have my own opinions, but.
Speaker 6 (23:26):
This this doesn't seem to be an organic, an organic movement.
It feels like it has nefarious underpinnings your thoughts.
Speaker 3 (23:38):
Well, absolutely, and when they put the work of the
name calling and adammin of the pat it's just the
fine that they have lost for debate.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Chris, I have to go up now.
Speaker 6 (23:48):
I messed this line up. Hold on rub against the
break one moment. Chris Marks is our guest. You can
find him on Twitter's fantastic. They remain scared the death
of you, and they remain scared to death of truth.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Michael Show going anywhere, even if Trump does you're not, yes,
is Chris Marks?
Speaker 6 (24:06):
He is, Uh, We're going to learn more about him,
but he has some very interesting perspectives on global warming.
I've been following him for a while, and as I
often do when I respect someone in their work, I
reach out and say, hey, can you come on and
talk to me and a whole lot of my friends
about what you're talking about. Okay, so we're talking about
the underpinnings that backing the real impetus and genesis behind
(24:28):
the global warming movement.
Speaker 1 (24:29):
I had to cut you off, so good.
Speaker 4 (24:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
So back in the nineteen eighties, we really got a
hold of the ozone ozone scared that we had, and
so that I'm signing the Montreal Protocol and the chloafloacarbons
that you know, led to the allegedly led to the
depletion of ozone and stratosphere.
Speaker 4 (24:52):
And the next big.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
Thing on their list of priorities to tackle the United Nations,
that says, was the carbon dioxide emissions. And they really
wanted to regulate COO two emissions in the context of
this new emerging issue at the time, and we're talking
about nineteen eighty seven, nineteen eighty eight, of this global
warming movement, and this was really instigated by the likes
(25:13):
of NASA's doctor James Hansen. He was at their daughter
Institute for Space Studies for many years.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
And then, of course, I.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
Think then Senator Al Gore, who of course became our
vice president and kind of the political face of the
climate change movement really for the longest time until the
course CRETA somewhere came along. But in the nineteen eighties,
the United Nations really had this kind of policy goal
to regulate CO two emissions because this was the way
that they could really kind of control it, have leverage
(25:43):
over energy companies and manufacturing industry, and so they kind
of had the policy car ahead of the scientific course,
and they were really looking for to when they formed
the UN Environment Program and of course in nineteen ninety
the inter Governmental Panel and Climate Change the IPCC, they
had this kind of policy goal to regulate these emissions,
and they wanted to find They wanted to bank Royal
(26:04):
scientists to have science that supported that policy agenda, and
so it was decided virtually a decade ago that almost
all scientific research will be funded by the federal government,
and that's of course allocated in a portion through Congress each year,
through the research and development funds. And when we decided
to put politicians and therefore policy goals in charge of
(26:27):
that research funding, then we really made science captive of
a political agenda. And this is something that Dwight President
Dwight D. Eisenhower warned could happen and warned against that.
They devised it against going down this route, and is
nineteen sixty one Farewell Address. And now and now we
have an army of scientists, these foot soldiers, whose careers
(26:47):
their success in academia in order to secure tenure at university,
in order to get accolades at these prestigious organizations like
AMS and the American Geophysical Union and the Royal Society,
their careers depend on the government and being concerned enough
about climate change and an environment environmental issues to continue
(27:08):
to put money towards their research so that they can
have successful careers. And when you put when you when
you have this kind of conflict of interest, it really
degrades the quality of science and calls into question of
modis behind it. And this is interesting because I'm often
accused of being a you know, funded for by the
fossil fuel industry, which isn't true, but and and that
(27:29):
would be a conflict of interest potentially when it comes
to conducting research. But they never mentioned the fact that
a lot of these organizations like Climate Central and the
World Weather Attribution, which blame climate change on extreme weather events,
and they cherry pick charts and data to show in
cases when you look at the full Bitta Setter's no increase.
These organizations are bankrolled by environmental groups and a lot
(27:50):
of organizations that donate to advocate for left wing calls,
is like planned A Parenthood and of course Dajor donators
and family trusts that donate to the Democratic Party. So
that's definitely a conflict of interest there. And the government
funding the political aspirations behind some of these policies and
the science that needs to support them, they're a conflict
of interest. So it's when what people always look at,
(28:12):
you know, all the the deniers, the skeptics are funded
by a.
Speaker 4 (28:15):
Big oil Well, there's conflict of interest everywhere, and you
got to be careful. But so that's something that they
never want to address.
Speaker 6 (28:24):
No, And you know, I think if if a conflict
of interest or potential conflict of interest is disclosed up front.
I think that's very important. You know, It's like when
a witness goes on the stand. I start a life
as a lawyer. As long as we understand, you know
who's paying this quote unquote expert witness, because that very
(28:44):
likely colors what they're doing. We'll still listen to what
they have to say, but we do deserve to know that,
and then from there we can have the conversation.
Speaker 1 (28:52):
So many people that do what you do, but from the.
Speaker 6 (28:54):
Other side, that is, argue this issue and they're being
paid by particular interests and don't disclose it. I find
that to be disingenuous and very disturbing, particularly when it
comes from external agents of the United States whose interest
is in slowing down our fossil fuel production and dominance
on that subject. I am of the opinion that the
(29:19):
burning of several thousand year old dinosaur bones as an
energy source is insanely efficient and it makes our quality
of life a lot better at a very low cost,
with minimal damage to the environment. And it's damage I'm
willing to sustain for the improvement and quality of life.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
Your thought, well, I've always been of the opinion because
I kind of be as objective as possible when we
all have biases. I have biases. Everybody has bias. Every
scientist has biases, whether he or she admits it or not.
But I don't really care where our energy comes from
that we use to power modern civilization, so long as
(29:59):
it is one affordable for the working class and low
income families, two it's sustainable, and three it's efficient. So
those are free criteria that I have for energy sources.
It could come from very farts for all I care,
and I don't care. But when you've forced expensive and unreliable,
intermittent energy on people, it makes their quality of it
(30:20):
lowers their quality of life, and that's not something that
we should be aiming for.
Speaker 4 (30:23):
That's not progress.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
And a lot of the renewable energy technologies, primarily utility
scale wind and utility scale solar, do not fit the
description of a sustainable, cost efficient energy source because when
they are added to the grid, they don't replace fossil fuels.
They have extreme high land requirements and that of course
(30:45):
increases property taxes. They have load balancing costs for their
intermittency because they're at least efficient energy sources, and all
of those once they're factored in to the generation costs
actually make them more expensive than any other technology, any
fossil fuel technology, and more expensive than.
Speaker 4 (31:00):
Even nuclear power.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
And fossil fields have provided for our way of life
for well over.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
One hundred and seventy five years, and they have.
Speaker 3 (31:08):
Lifted millions, probably billions of people from poverty. They have
the technologies that have emerged as a result of us
using them, has doubled the average of life expectancy in
every inhabited continent, including Africa, since eighteen since the eighteen fifties,
and it has provided for warning coordination systems that alert
us when extreme weather A buns are coming. If we
(31:28):
didn't have fossil fields power in the grid, we wouldn't
have the Wi Fi connections to connect us to the
Internet to stay in touch with the National Weather Service
alerts and a hurricane from spailing up the coast and
so on. Winds simply cannot pick up the demand to
meet it. Cannot simply cannot fill that gap to meet
the demand if we were to take fossil fuels off
one now, solar power does have a future. People put
(31:49):
it on our roofs in their houses, and people put
it and it should be put on like the roofs
are put on canopies that covered parking lots for shade protection,
to generate electricity, but to destroy tens of thousands of
eight is a land wilderness in the ecosystems, farmers, biodiversity,
which of course is the difference in different plants and
animals that live in are in an area, in an
(32:09):
ecosystem and a habitat. That's not that's counterproductive to progress
on both the environment and.
Speaker 4 (32:14):
Of course our state of welfare.
Speaker 3 (32:16):
If we really really want to reduce our dependence on
fossil fuels, and of course we're still going to need
to oil for as long as you know, in control
of combustion engines remain profitable because a lot of people
are still going to refuse to buy electric cars because
they cannot get them to go, you know, nine hundred
miles in the winter time on along road trip to
visit family.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
But we're still good. But if you want to really
reduce our dependence on.
Speaker 3 (32:38):
The coal and natural gas, and natural gas is largely
replaced coal in many parts of the world, especially that
the United States, we should be training into nuclear power
and nuclear fission because it is a is the most
carbon free energy source. It's the safest energy source on
a desk of caroline hour basis, only behind solar
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!