Rebel News Podcast - March 28, 2024


SHEILA GUNN REID ｜ How do Conservatives take back the climate change narrative from the Left？


Episode Stats

Length

47 minutes

Words per Minute

172.59883

Word Count

8,213

Sentence Count

9

Misogynist Sentences

9

Hate Speech Sentences

4


Summary

What do the official conservative types have to do to change the agenda around climate change? My guest today has some advice for them, and i think it's good advice considering he used to work for some of those official conservative folks.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 what do the official conservative types have to do to change the agenda around climate change
00:00:19.920 my guest today has some advice for them and i think it's good advice considering he used to
00:00:25.240 work for some of those official conservative types i'm sheila gun reed and you're watching the gun show
00:00:30.840 you know i think society has never been more ripe for a challenge to the
00:00:55.160 accepted orthodoxy around human induced climate change the reason i see this is because all the
00:01:02.740 other accepted orthodoxies around us are sort of falling what used to be accepted orthodoxy around
00:01:11.760 gender transition of minors it seemed to be happening all over the place there for a little
00:01:16.760 bit well governments across the world are putting backstops in place and preventing children from
00:01:26.320 being even told that they can medically transition their gender which is not a thing that you can
00:01:32.360 really actually do but people also have a great distrust right now in institutions including
00:01:41.260 government they distrust the institutions of justice they distrust the institutions of medicine
00:01:50.400 and health care and a lot of that has to do with all the things we found out to be untrue that we were
00:01:58.080 told were true during the covid19 pandemic or rather the government's overreaction to the covid19
00:02:06.240 pandemic so with a rising skepticism amongst the population maybe now is the time to push back on
00:02:15.520 this accepted narrative that co2 is the driver of climate change and that humans are the reason there
00:02:23.580 is too much co2 which is driving climate change but how do you do it how do you get those people
00:02:29.760 in power to move away from all the things they told us were true for so long well my guest tonight has a
00:02:40.920 pathway for that to happen it's tom harris from the international climate science coalition we've got a
00:02:46.680 long interview so i'm gonna zip it so you can listen to it
00:02:49.840 joining me now is good friend of the show tom harris from the international climate science
00:03:01.880 coalition canada and i wanted to have tom on the show because well it's almost april 1st and that
00:03:10.400 means april fool's day and the jokers in the house of commons are raising the carbon tax on canadians as
00:03:18.160 their way to as they say mitigate climate change i'm not sure how if i give justin trudeau more of
00:03:24.280 my money to waste it will make the weather better but that's the logic if you follow the liberals um
00:03:29.800 but tom's got some ideas for what the conservative parties and conservative activists can do
00:03:38.280 something different for once other than the homogenous narrative that comes out of ottawa
00:03:45.160 where the only way to deal with climate change is to pay more money to the government
00:03:51.460 because people are causing catastrophic climate change and i think when we concede that
00:03:57.080 we concede the first ditch to the other side don't we
00:04:00.220 yeah for sure it's interesting because pierre poly of two days ago had here in ottawa
00:04:06.200 an axe the tax rally and you know he's been having these all across canada we had a couple of our
00:04:11.860 representatives go uh they both left early because it was super loud and super crowded
00:04:17.400 but i watched it on the internet and i you know assessed it but you know the trouble here sheila is
00:04:23.560 there's a big disconnect between what the party brass are saying and doing and what the grassroots are
00:04:30.260 doing you know we had a a booth at the strong and free networking conference two years ago and we were
00:04:37.040 saying you know it's there's no climate emergency you know we were being very candid about the
00:04:41.340 circumstance and hundreds of grassroots supporters came up to us and said yeah we agree with you
00:04:46.660 but our leaders aren't saying this and in fact it's interesting because just down the hall they had a
00:04:53.160 seminar with panelists and everything about a conservative approach to stopping climate change
00:04:58.680 or words to that effect you know so they had a question period afterwards and so i sat right in the
00:05:04.620 front row and i was gonna ask them some hard questions well they canceled the question period
00:05:08.720 i have a feeling they saw me sitting there but regardless um i went to the chairman of the seminar
00:05:15.000 afterwards and i said do you think we have dangerous climate change caused by humans that it's worth
00:05:20.820 restructuring our entire infrastructure to try to stop and he said no i said well then why are you
00:05:26.400 holding a session here about a conservative approach to stopping climate change and he said oh we fought that
00:05:32.620 war and we already lost it i said we still have to feel though didn't we yeah and i said no you never
00:05:40.040 fought that war you had a few people like preston manning gave a couple good speeches on it bob mills
00:05:46.200 did stephen harper did uh you know a few people did that but you immediately quit and you just they
00:05:51.640 switched sides in fact preston manning switched sides stephen harper of course approved with john baird
00:05:57.260 the paris agreement um bob mills who i worked for he changed sides totally you know so i mean what
00:06:03.540 happened is the leadership never really fought this issue and they just simply succumbed they just kind
00:06:09.460 of rolled over and play dead oh yeah okay yeah we will we lost and and you know it's a big mistake
00:06:15.580 because i think the ultimate objective of the conservative party peer polyev in particular should be to kill
00:06:22.840 the climate scare in canada okay that should be the real objective because the carbon tax is only a
00:06:29.460 symptom of the disease okay it's a symptom of the disease the disease is the idea that we can stop
00:06:36.320 climate change which is of course nonsense i mean it's absolute and total nonsense and so what i find
00:06:42.920 is that they seem to lack an overall strategy for how they're going to kill this thing because it's not
00:06:49.220 just the carbon tax i mean the price of course permeates all through the whole supply chain and
00:06:55.400 you know in many many ways the climate crisis is crippling farmers it's crippling our oil and gas
00:07:00.840 industry it's you know even anti-abortion people are finding that the climate scare is now linking up
00:07:07.680 with the abortion industry because of course they want to have less people on earth and you know you go
00:07:12.660 through all there must be dozens of um areas that the climate scare is affecting but none of these
00:07:19.720 groups are saying sorry sorry municipal taxes oh yeah ottawa where you are where you have one of the
00:07:27.240 most vehement but climate yes that's right yeah and so what they need is a sensible strategy
00:07:36.100 a long-term goal to kill the climate scare in canada and it's not just delaying the
00:07:41.780 carbon taxes 2030 2050 like daniel smith is doing you know i i really like daniel smith but
00:07:48.420 no you don't need a carbon or a carbon neutral at all but you know right now in the conservative plan
00:07:55.740 okay they have the old one still on the internet which um was erin o'tools but even in their september
00:08:01.640 2023 policy document they say this they want the adoption of a pan-canadian low carbon low carbon
00:08:08.260 aluminum purchasing policy and they say they want to have a purposeful gradual transition to a lower
00:08:15.860 carbon use future what for i mean why do they want to have that it's it's damaging to their industries
00:08:22.560 you know to all the industries that support conservatives and they go on further to say
00:08:26.620 including carbon capture technology which is a disaster okay that's that's a recipe for no coal
00:08:33.280 okay it's also extremely expensive it it's also dangerous potentially dangerous if you're too close
00:08:39.260 to it and i know you are uh badly battery storage okay so you have to say well what the
00:08:47.360 conservatives leadership are saying is and i'm sure they're strongly influenced by red tories in their
00:08:53.300 communications and strategy section okay when i worked for the party um when it was the canadian
00:08:58.740 alliance i was a legislative assistant for bob mills what i found was that in the back rooms
00:09:03.940 while most of the mps in those days you know were definitely conservative both socially and
00:09:08.700 economically and practically the red tories were in the background and you know when the two parties
00:09:15.000 merged when the canadian alliance merged with the reform party what happened is that the red tories in
00:09:22.500 the background even though they only had two mps okay in the progressive conservative party and they had
00:09:28.020 i don't know maybe 25 in the reform party what happened or in those days the canadian alliance
00:09:33.140 but what happened is that the people in the back room essentially hijacked the party so you ended up
00:09:39.900 with a red tory party which now is not really very different to the progressive conservative party
00:09:45.920 of brian mulrooney and kim campbell okay so we're right back to where we started and what they've been
00:09:51.940 saying and you know you can sort of see this they're saying well you know we can't say these things
00:09:56.100 because the polls show that most canadians think that we have a climate crisis okay good so that's
00:10:01.900 your starting point your starting point is sorry well in many cases they're push polls right yeah
00:10:08.120 yeah exactly they'll ask people stupid questions like should we save the climate for future generations
00:10:14.220 you know like i i can remember my dad was questioned in one of these polls and he said how do i answer a
00:10:20.820 stupid question like that there's no answer when did you stop beating your wife that's yeah exactly
00:10:27.020 and so sorry to interrupt you but i've just seen abacus data polling that says that even for millennials
00:10:32.980 and gen z people so regular old trudeau voters or future trudeau voters they don't even put climate
00:10:40.680 change in their top five issues it's all affordability it's oh yeah they only care about seeing the fact
00:10:49.200 that the lifestyle of their middle class parents is completely unattainable for them and they are
00:10:55.200 right to be told that the carbon tax is one of the reasons that you will never afford a house
00:11:00.060 yeah yeah yeah exactly you know it's interesting because stats can last month they came out actually
00:11:06.500 this month they came out with the inflation figures for february and canada's doing pretty well it's 2.8
00:11:13.020 percent okay which isn't too bad but the interesting thing there is that saskatchewan was only
00:11:18.600 1.7 percent and stats can itself said the difference which is more than a third okay it's 1.1 percent
00:11:26.200 difference between canada as a whole and saskatchewan was because they weren't collecting the carbon tax
00:11:31.520 okay and that's so they keep saying oh it's only fractions of no it's huge the impact of the carbon tax
00:11:39.460 is huge and so my whole point sheila is that they need a long-term strategy where they're going to kill
00:11:46.640 the disease not just the symptom and so i've laid out a few steps here okay now at first they're going
00:11:53.060 to say oh my god we can't attack the climate scare will be called deniers you know and all that sort
00:11:56.980 of thing well okay yeah you don't do it all at once you don't do what danielle smith did back in 2012
00:12:03.860 when she was leader of the wild wild rose party um she was at a leader's debate and she expressed a
00:12:12.240 sensible doubt about the climate scare and oh my god the audience went crazy they were booing and
00:12:17.920 everything else and she was ripped up by the media and everything now that doesn't work obviously you
00:12:23.180 can't just go from nothing to being a climate realist you have to move there gradually and you
00:12:28.820 have to change the language you know this is something that i'm very sad to see that pier polia for
00:12:35.100 example talks about you know carbon emissions and things like that now you know it's interesting
00:12:40.660 because there's a book called the art of war it's an ancient chinese document and it talks about you
00:12:47.320 know what you shouldn't do and one of the things you shouldn't do is fight your battles on your
00:12:51.960 enemies terrain because they understand it a lot better than you they know all the escape routes
00:12:57.140 and everything else but you see that's what the conservatives are doing they're fighting the
00:13:01.180 battle on the climate alarmist terrain because they're using climate alarmist language and i'll just
00:13:08.100 give you an example um they call it a carbon tax what is it really it's not a carbon tax carbon is
00:13:14.940 soot or graphite and and when you say carbon tax people think of things like this which is a piece
00:13:20.020 of bituminous coal okay they think of something dirty so what they should be calling it is a tax on
00:13:26.000 energy okay or a tax on everything or if you want to be exact you call it a tax on carbon dioxide
00:13:32.480 okay because carbon dioxide is benign um instead of calling it carbon pollution carbon footprint low
00:13:38.440 carbon energy and so on they should call it a carbon dioxide tax or a carbon dioxide everything
00:13:44.720 and instead they're using the language of their enemy okay and they have to stop saying or even
00:13:51.320 implying that we need to reduce emissions okay because what that really means in in the language of the
00:13:57.480 climate alarmist is carbon dioxide because 80 percent of canada's greenhouse gas emissions from
00:14:03.100 humans is carbon dioxide if you don't count water vapor here's another thing they constantly complain
00:14:09.880 about how china is you know expanding and they're boosting their greenhouse gas emissions because
00:14:14.880 they're building coal stations all over the world well if you're going to be consistent and if co2
00:14:20.020 doesn't matter then they have to stop criticizing china because it just makes it sound like this is bad
00:14:26.620 never talk about a climate emergency or make statements about extreme weather increasing as a
00:14:32.020 rationale for their plans i think you could attack china on particulate oh yeah but exactly carbon
00:14:39.460 emission that's right because they're burning low quality coal so yeah that's worth attacking them over
00:14:45.120 so that's the first thing they have to stop you and they could do this immediately they could do it
00:14:49.880 starting tomorrow and you know the left and the climate activists wouldn't really even notice
00:14:55.480 right but you see the trouble is by using the language of their enemy it's going to be much
00:15:00.460 harder for them later to step back and and to actually do the right thing so they have to set the stage
00:15:07.040 so that they can eventually do the right thing they have to stop boosting carbon sequestration
00:15:13.240 pier poliev has been doing this all the time first of all it's not carbon it's carbon dioxide
00:15:18.000 they have to stop doing it because you know it's as i said before it's extremely expensive it
00:15:23.740 essentially rules out coal and um it is potentially dangerous i hate to tell you since you live right
00:15:29.860 beside one however i mean the odds of it escaping while you're there is pretty low now they have to
00:15:35.720 stop boosting electric vehicles as a solution to climate change which pier poliev does as well
00:15:41.640 that is a mistake because it suggests that the reduction of co2 is actually important i mean it's okay
00:15:48.980 tell people yeah you buy an ev if you want to buy an ev but there's going to be no more government
00:15:53.340 support any more than any other form of public transit or personal transit the last thing here
00:16:00.320 they have to stop doing right now is they have to stop saying we're going to get developing countries to
00:16:06.000 stop using their coal and instead use our clean natural gas yeah natural gas is great we should sell
00:16:12.660 it to them we should look for any way possible to sell it to them but the idea that we're going to help
00:16:17.180 them stop climate change no you're just digging yourself in a hole that's going to be hard to get
00:16:21.700 out of later i and i'm all for exporting our clean technology to them scrubbers to make their coal-fired
00:16:29.800 electricity more efficient less particulate that's what we should be exporting to countries that are
00:16:35.620 still using coal to develop their economies there are plenty of ways that we can make the world
00:16:40.800 actually cleaner without oh yeah thing co2 well that's right and and you know coal is a wonderful
00:16:48.020 source you know you have to think about it when you have a massive pile of coal on your property if
00:16:53.520 you're a power station you've got solid fuel for a year or more okay with natural gas you have to have
00:17:00.760 a pipe coming in all the time so if you want to secure the grid you should have coal as part of your mix
00:17:06.260 in a way it's sort of like nuclear because nuclear they store on site as well so so it's a very very
00:17:11.960 secure energy source and as you pointed out there's lots of pollution control techniques that we can use
00:17:17.880 to actually make it a clean you know clean fuel to use now and here's something interesting in terry
00:17:25.560 corcoran's article in the financial post he pointed out that in fact there was a particular um writer
00:17:32.320 pav and i can't remember his last name but he wrote to finance canada and he said you realize
00:17:37.840 that environment canada itself disagrees with what christopher freeland said about you know increasing
00:17:44.760 extreme weather and everything else and similarly as terry pointed out in the article terry corcoran from
00:17:50.280 the financial post there are many times when you know the government is making statements that are not
00:17:55.820 supported by even the un ipcc and you know it's interesting because we had a um community dialogue
00:18:03.840 here that was put on by a group called cafe which is a very left-wing environmental group and they said
00:18:10.140 they're following the science they're following the ipcc well i looked up in the ipcc their statements
00:18:16.500 and they're not there okay the ipcc never talks about a climate emergency or climate crisis
00:18:22.940 except when they're saying this is what the media says so what the government or sorry sorry what
00:18:29.820 pierre polyev and the opposition party need to do right away is every time the liberals say things
00:18:35.360 like christopher freeland did or trudeau does that is actually not in the ipcc documents or in some cases
00:18:41.680 is in there but it says the opposite they should correct them and they should also say look your own
00:18:47.400 environment canada said that there was no trend in precipitation so you're telling us there's going to be
00:18:52.680 more floods or more droughts or whatever there's no trend okay your own environment canada people said
00:18:58.280 that similarly ipcc says the whole says the same thing about extreme weather you know there's really
00:19:04.060 no trend so that's something they have to correct the liberals on and they can do that safely because
00:19:09.420 their own environment canada says the same thing we did this just the other day with um stephen
00:19:16.840 guilbeau when he said that canada doesn't need any more roads and he was relying on analysis he said
00:19:23.700 this in his speech we relied on analysis done by environment and climate change canada which said that
00:19:29.580 we don't need any more roads in the network so i asked for that analysis and guess what doesn't
00:19:36.940 exist they don't it doesn't exist yeah yeah so i mean it's a very safe thing for them to do to
00:19:42.840 actually hold the government to account when they're saying things that are different to their
00:19:47.640 own environment services now right now here's another thing they can do right now they should
00:19:52.320 start to shift the cpc focus away from stopping climate change to adaptation okay to build resilience
00:20:00.680 uh with a particular focus on cooling quite frankly because that's a lot more dangerous for canada
00:20:05.620 a high latitude country than than a little bit of warming um they should call for all subsidies
00:20:11.200 for wind and solar power to be totally removed okay and of course what the government will jump up
00:20:17.780 and down they'll say oh my god you know it's cost effective you know we can have wind and solar and
00:20:22.200 it's it's competitive okay if it's competitive take away all of its subsidies because what will happen
00:20:28.300 of course is that it won't be competitive anymore and it'll underline for people the fact that these are
00:20:35.060 not uh inexpensive energy sources they're extremely expensive now here's something they can do
00:20:41.140 sorry move on tom yeah in alberta we very recently decided that the wind and solar companies should face
00:20:48.780 the same rigorous environmental legislation that oil and gas companies face and the whaling and the
00:20:55.720 national of the teeth from these people has been quite wonderful uh yeah wonderful that's great
00:21:03.320 before have they faced uh having to put up money up front for reclamation they've never had to deal
00:21:09.800 with that before they've never been told you actually are not allowed to put up wind turbines this close
00:21:16.640 to people i'm sorry we are protecting all these swaths of canadian landscape we're making sure it is
00:21:24.120 going to be undisturbed by these holy hideous wind turbines and unmitigatable solar panels and they are
00:21:33.640 losing their marbles and how can they be happier welcome to the real world guys this is what oil and gas
00:21:39.540 has to deal with all the time and they do a point oh yeah and and if oil and gas kill a single duck oh man
00:21:45.420 they're in big trouble oh boy you know in the united states believe it or not they have what's called a take
00:21:51.340 permit okay which means that wind turbines can kill a certain number of endangered species now they should remove
00:21:58.640 all that kind of preferential treatment of wind and solar and if they compete then great they compete
00:22:04.840 but but they don't of course they get all this preferential treatment now you might remember back
00:22:09.980 in 2011 uh nancy green rain who was a senator she held an open hearing who and she brought in tim
00:22:17.880 patterson from carlton she brought an ian clark from ottawa u a yan weiser from ottawa u and ross mckittrick
00:22:24.380 from guelph university and they were speaking to a committee of environment in the senate and they
00:22:30.660 gave an alternative point of view on climate i mean that was brilliant okay now the sad thing is the
00:22:36.060 harper government didn't really publicize that they should have publicized it like crazy because it was
00:22:40.460 right in the middle of his his tenure but they didn't so what they need to do um over the next few
00:22:46.940 months is pierre polyev in my opinion should find a senator who will be like a center point and uh and
00:22:53.580 bring in climate experts on the other side of the climate debate now it doesn't have to have any
00:22:59.580 association with pierre it could just be a senate committee hearing in which you bring in people
00:23:04.820 like ian clark from ottawa u okay all those people are still alive they could bring them in and um the
00:23:11.340 beauty there is that if the poly of government then were to publicize it and say look we're not climate
00:23:17.180 experts but it is interesting that a senator brought in these people giving a completely different point of
00:23:22.760 view and um so that's the first thing and once they've had the hearing they have to make sure
00:23:29.480 it's well publicized okay i don't know of anybody in the government that publicized it at all
00:23:34.540 then they have to do some interesting things here they have to coordinate non-push public opinion polls
00:23:41.540 you know as i said at the beginning so often these opinion polls they're they're stupid i mean they
00:23:47.620 don't actually give a climate realist like me an opportunity to give any answer because they're
00:23:52.580 asking questions that assume that you think there's a climate crisis so i mean the first question would
00:23:58.360 be something like this how much would you personally be prepared to pay per month so that canada will
00:24:03.540 lead the world in its attempt to quote stop climate change and you know they find in poll after poll in
00:24:09.800 the u.s that they're only prepared to pay like maybe fifty dollars a month oh at most at most
00:24:16.260 and that'll be very powerful because of course if you can show that the vast majority of canadians want
00:24:21.700 to pay almost nothing then how do you subsidize the programs you can ask them a question that has not
00:24:28.540 been asked in polls and that is this do you think that we're in the midst of a climate crisis so severe
00:24:34.820 that it's worth restructuring our entire energy infrastructure in an attempt to protect the
00:24:40.520 climate now of course most people will say i don't know which is appropriate because the next
00:24:47.900 question how much do you think it's warm since the mid-19th century most people probably say uh
00:24:52.980 uh 10 degrees this must be something pretty incredible because of course we're told all the
00:24:57.380 time it's a climate crisis but in fact it's 1.2 degrees okay so what you have to do is then
00:25:04.760 massively publicize the results of the polls and this all sets the stage all these prime primary
00:25:11.240 steps okay none of them are particularly difficult or risky for the conservatives to do it all it sets
00:25:17.700 the stage for them to call perhaps a year from now or maybe half a year to call for the government to
00:25:24.700 convene unbiased open public hearings into the science of climate change with experts on all sides
00:25:31.260 okay because then pierre polyev can say look you know we've seen this little hearing done by a
00:25:37.140 senator and that sort of raises the question oh how settled is the science canadians generally speaking
00:25:43.120 don't support spending anything like what's being currently spent i mean i heard last night from um
00:25:48.780 lauren lauren gunter he did an excellent interview with brian lily actually and uh i think he was saying
00:25:54.480 up to 200 billion has been spent by the trudeau government yeah up to 200 billion on climate change
00:26:00.900 now if you divide that by the number of canadians it's a lot more than what canadians want to spend
00:26:05.440 that's for sure so they have to ask them will you have an open unbiased public hearing into the science
00:26:12.460 of climate change with experts on all sides of the issue invited to testify and there's tons of experts
00:26:18.480 on all sides of the issue and i'll show you these reports here okay these uh non-governmental
00:26:25.300 international panel on climate change there are thousands of references of scientists so you can
00:26:29.620 easily find scientists to speak out not just the four people that i was mentioning they're all over
00:26:34.480 the place of course the government will say no no the science is settled you know and and of course
00:26:39.520 then the conservatives can simply say well what are the liberals hiding if the science is settled
00:26:45.560 then they won't be able to find anybody on the other side of the debate uh or are they afraid
00:26:50.940 that canadians will hear something other than what they want them to hear okay i think that they could
00:26:55.760 really make hay about this now the last two steps are are further down the road and i know
00:27:01.380 the red tories in the back in the back room their hair will stand up when i say this but perhaps in a
00:27:07.580 year or after getting elected then they the conservatives can convene open unbiased hearings into the
00:27:14.660 science and what will happen of course is you'll have experts like ian clark and ross mckittrick
00:27:19.940 saying essentially there's no climate crisis all of this is just public relations and communications
00:27:25.760 fluff it's not real then you'll have people like andrew weaver and lots of others say yes there is a
00:27:31.180 climate crisis so what will happen is the public will be very confused they will not know who they
00:27:37.500 should believe now that in a way is an appropriate circumstance because the science of climate change is
00:27:43.920 probably the most complex science that we've ever tackled ever okay i mean it is it it is potentially
00:27:50.240 even harder than the atom bomb i mean it's an enormously complex field so for the average person
00:27:55.740 to judge which of these scientists is right you know they can't do it and so what they can do after
00:28:03.160 the hearing when there's huge confusion you know and the media are attacking them for having this hearing
00:28:07.860 pier poliev can step back and say well look i don't know whether there's a climate crisis or not
00:28:14.440 i'm not a climate expert however there are many experts who don't think there is and there's some who say
00:28:19.800 that there isn't there isn't and there is okay and so he says well until the science is more settled
00:28:26.180 and until the experts actually have some sort of consensus which they don't have now despite all this 97%
00:28:32.520 nonsense we're gonna back off on attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions except in cases where
00:28:39.780 it's giving you uh you know no regrets policy where you're reducing pollution at the same time i mean
00:28:45.220 that's fine we want to increase energy efficiency as well and we're gonna focus then on midi or adaptation
00:28:51.720 and resilience and if at some point in the future there's more consensus among the scientists then yeah we'll
00:28:59.740 consider having mitigation policies but in the meantime it doesn't make any sense and you know
00:29:04.740 i think at that point after you've done all those preliminary steps the public will say yeah that
00:29:11.480 makes sense until you know what's going on until the scientists agree then it doesn't make sense to
00:29:17.660 spend another 200 billion trying to stop something we perhaps can't even stop yeah i mean when you've got
00:29:25.820 uh scientists on either side of the debate arguing about the issue that would indicate to normal people
00:29:31.880 that the science is very far from settled regardless of what the media and the liberals keep telling us
00:29:37.420 but that's exactly why the media and the liberals don't want these discussions to happen
00:29:42.600 is because it is proof that the science is well that's right and you know it's interesting when i started
00:29:49.000 writing about the climate issue in 1999 with a scientist who doesn't really want me to mention
00:29:54.720 him now because you know it's actually dangerous to be a climate skeptic it's dangerous to your career
00:29:59.840 it's dangerous to all sorts of things i mean tim ball had five death threats and they were serious death
00:30:05.800 threats okay one of our scientists who was from another country i won't say which country because it
00:30:10.340 would narrow down who i'm talking about but he had racist death threats against his family
00:30:15.480 for allowing the publication of uh papers because he was one of the editors of a journal
00:30:20.980 for allowing them to be published so i mean it's a very dangerous thing for these scientists to speak
00:30:26.100 out in many cases certainly dangerous to their careers so i mean i have a huge respect for those
00:30:31.320 four scientists that testified in nancy's hearing nancy green rain's hearing and nancy herself i mean
00:30:36.480 she was always a climate she still is as far as i know a climate realist you know and she's also a
00:30:41.240 fantastic skier even now but um hey you know i honestly think that the long-term goal of the
00:30:49.520 conservative party of canada should be to rescue canada to rescue canada from the climate scare and
00:30:56.040 they need a step-by-step approach starting with changing the language very quietly in the background
00:31:01.100 they don't have to make any noise about it at all they just say you know um mr chudeau this tax on
00:31:07.840 carbon dioxide blah blah blah and they can can you talk so in other words they change the language
00:31:12.360 and they do it quietly they stop calling for an emissions cut they start focusing on adaptation
00:31:18.760 and they eventually will move the population over to a more realistic point of view now this this idea
00:31:26.120 of always driving policy based on public opinion is a huge mistake i think we've talked about this
00:31:33.100 before but there was a study done a few years ago by researchers at mcgill university drexel university
00:31:39.320 and ohio state and the question they were asking is what is it that drives climate change fears in the
00:31:46.980 public and they looked at all sorts of things they looked at the science they looked at the media they
00:31:52.660 looked at statements from leaders and and you know climate activists and things like that what they'd found
00:31:58.540 was that the major factor driving climate skepticism and of course they hated that they didn't like climate
00:32:05.020 skepticism the major factor was the statement of the elites in society and in particular the statements of
00:32:12.140 politicians so when somebody in the back room of the conservative party says no we can't oppose it
00:32:17.600 because public opinion supports it what they don't realize they don't appreciate the role they play
00:32:24.420 in determining public opinion now i'm not advocating that they jump out the way daniel smith did in 2012
00:32:31.300 and express a you know a sensible climate realist position bam just like that no they have to they
00:32:37.900 have to build up to it gradually through the kinds of steps i was describing and then as they start to
00:32:44.360 say these things public opinion starts to change and in this paper they gave a really good example
00:32:50.040 you remember john mccain was a somewhat left-leaning conservative in the united states a senator
00:32:55.260 and he was supporting the climate scare and in those days the republicans generally speaking
00:33:00.520 did support the climate scare so you had both parties democrats and republicans supporting it and
00:33:06.580 public support for extreme action on climate change was quite high however when the republicans split
00:33:12.640 and they started to question the climate scare and started to disagree public opinion greatly came down
00:33:19.860 with regards to their support for extreme action on climate change so what they concluded is it's the
00:33:26.180 leaders in society and in particular the politicians who to a large extent drive public opinion so if the
00:33:33.220 conservative brass are going to wait until public opinion opposes the climate scare before they start
00:33:39.760 to oppose it they're going to wait forever because because they're one of the drivers of public opinion
00:33:45.160 so you know i think it really boils down to this i mean do they want to kill the climate scare or not
00:33:51.940 and they should very definitely want to kill it because the carbon tax is just one of the symptoms
00:33:56.800 of the disease and they need a sensible long-term strategy to kill it and and as i said at the beginning
00:34:03.840 there's a massive disconnect right now between the grassroots who want them to do it and the brass who are
00:34:11.060 following these red tory advisors i believe in the background and they won't do it you know the
00:34:17.480 conservative party of canada the federal one should make note of what happened when jason kenney listened
00:34:23.220 to the red tories in the background instead of moving along as the blue tory we all thought he was
00:34:28.980 it ended tragically for jason kenney and i think albertans frankly are better off because of it
00:34:34.100 tom i could talk to you all day about this issue um it's one of those things that i love challenging
00:34:40.060 the orthodoxy on um but how do people support the very important work that you do at the international
00:34:47.080 climate science coalition canada how do they hear your podcast um sign up to some of your releases and
00:34:56.160 get involved in the fight to change the agenda around this issue yeah for sure well the first thing
00:35:02.800 they should do is go to icsc-canada.com and they can see our latest reports we've been taking ottawa
00:35:11.320 as an example to actually take across canada we have a project called climate realism in action okay
00:35:18.080 it's not enough to be climate realist you have to actually do something and we have some really great
00:35:22.900 volunteers here in ottawa who've been working with me and who will go to you know election debates
00:35:28.780 they'll go to committee meetings and things like that and uh you know they do it on their own
00:35:33.500 volition i mean they don't work for me or anything but i'm able to help them prepare questions and bring
00:35:38.260 up points that make sense and you know we've had huge success i mean during the last election
00:35:43.480 catherine mckinney had a massive lead now we weren't the only ones of course who contributed to mark
00:35:48.600 suckliffe winning instead but we were able to bring into the debate into these different meetings
00:35:54.320 you know some of the points i mean catherine mckinney supported this 57 billion dollar plan
00:35:59.500 you know which was totally crazy for a city of a million um and you know we were able to highlight
00:36:05.260 that and i it we've been told that we contributed to her defeat and similarly we're actually um having
00:36:12.300 people speak before the committee you know different volunteers come to me and say hey i want to speak
00:36:16.800 before the committee i say great what do you want to talk about oh i hate these wind turbines so we work
00:36:20.960 together so what we're trying to do under the climate realism in action project is we're actually
00:36:27.140 trying to kill or not kill that's a wrong way to put it we're trying to get the city of ottawa to
00:36:32.720 develop sensible science-based and economics-based climate and energy policy okay and once we're
00:36:40.240 successful there and i think we will be because we have a new mayor who's much more sensible we have
00:36:44.920 new committee members in the different committees who are also more sensible once we've done that
00:36:49.900 we plan to spread it across canada teaching activists in different cities how they can work
00:36:55.780 to you know have sensible climate and energy policy in their communities so i'm already working with
00:37:02.400 some activists in alberta and hamilton and oshawa and others where they reach out and they say hey can
00:37:07.220 you do a zoom call and talk to our people we have to go and give a presentation to the uh city's
00:37:12.480 environment committee and so yeah i do that so that's called climate realism in action and people can
00:37:17.440 support that by clicking on the big red donate button in the upper right hand corner because of
00:37:22.840 course we don't get funding from government that's for sure uh and so the web page is icsc-canada.com
00:37:29.660 we also of course have a couple of radio shows um the main radio show is the one i'll push right now
00:37:36.240 and that is the america out loud okay we have a show called the other side of the story and we bring
00:37:42.060 in all sorts of experts the thing we've been focusing on there most recently is the destruction
00:37:46.960 of well water on farms because of driving massive stanchions right into the ground boom boom boom boom
00:37:54.120 way through the water table ruining the water table of people who live nearby these these industrial wind
00:38:01.700 farms and um they're not farms of course it's the wrong term industrial wind facilities so yeah people go
00:38:08.560 to america out loud.com and they click on the menu and they can choose uh different shows and ours is
00:38:14.740 called the other side of the story we actually brought in people who've been victimized by this
00:38:19.560 you know their well water has been ruined christine burke is a great example in chatham kent county in
00:38:26.040 ontario she had generations of her family live on the farm and they never even bothered to filter the
00:38:31.040 water it was great and and i'll just show you just a second here that is her water now
00:38:38.040 okay see this jar here that's her water that's what comes out of her drinking water tap after
00:38:45.480 generations of not having to even use a filter she can't drink it okay she has to go into town every
00:38:53.820 day because of these damn wind turbines she has to go into town every day and get gallon jugs of water
00:38:59.760 now they they can't do that for their washing and the laundry so their clothes have this kind of
00:39:05.200 sediment in it you know and so we're publicizing that through our radio show in the most recent one
00:39:10.720 we had a actual geoscientist come on and he said yeah it's the wind turbines that are causing this and
00:39:16.580 i just have a look imagine you turn on your tap and that's what comes out after generations of clean
00:39:23.200 drinking water so you know there's whole many many groups that are being victimized by the climate scare
00:39:29.140 and we're starting to work with various various groups and the water people in particular so that's
00:39:35.060 us you know we're if people can support us we'll keep doing what we're doing well i'm sure people
00:39:41.420 will you are up against the deep pockets of not just the federal government municipal governments
00:39:47.660 foreign meddlers out of san francisco and their well-funded tentacles that meddle in canadian politics you're
00:39:54.480 just you know you're in a bit of a david and goliath situation but education is key and i think
00:40:00.620 you're addressing that and creating an army of volunteers and activists to you know take it to
00:40:07.940 the politicians make them accountable for what they are doing to people's lives with these green energy
00:40:13.200 policies yeah exactly and you know it's interesting they can succeed too i mean south of the city there was
00:40:19.800 a proposal to put in a battery pack one of these massive best system battery energy storage systems
00:40:25.320 which have the potential of massive fire and pollution and all sorts of things and quite a number
00:40:29.920 of activists there were a hundred people that went to a city um a hearing that was actually put on by the
00:40:35.680 company and i'll tell you they were angry as heck they said you know what about this what about that
00:40:40.820 and the um industry were shocked there were two counselors who were actually at the meeting and they saw
00:40:46.900 a hundred people you know yelling and saying no we don't want these battery packs just a few days
00:40:52.060 later the city council killed the project so you know climate realism in action can work okay and as far
00:41:00.160 as i know we're the only ones in canada who are actually coordinating individual activists to actually
00:41:05.660 get up and make solid points you know so i mean we really need to do this it's taking a page
00:41:11.560 out of saul alinsky's book rules for radicals okay when your group is small you have to make a lot of
00:41:18.620 noise and go to a lot of events and actually make it look like your group is big in this case the group
00:41:24.400 is pretty big you know because the farmers they don't want this on their farms jeez
00:41:28.900 well tom i just want to thank you so much for the work that you do on behalf of climate realists but
00:41:35.840 also the canadian taxpayer because somebody has to pay for all these bad ideas and in favor of property
00:41:41.380 rights as you're defending with the the well water problem um and we'll have you back on again very
00:41:47.040 very soon
00:41:47.760 well we've come to the portion of the show wherein we invite your viewer feedback i see it every week
00:42:00.220 i know it's getting redundant it must be to those of you who tune in every single week but i actually
00:42:06.060 care about what you think about the work that we do here rebel news and it's why i give you my email
00:42:10.660 address right now at sheila at rebel news dot com put gun show letters in the subject line so i know
00:42:16.260 why you're emailing me as one of the hundreds of people who email me every day it makes it easier
00:42:22.300 for me to find your comments about the show and who knows i might just read your viewer feedback
00:42:27.520 on air but maybe you don't want to email me maybe you are watching a clip of the show or the free
00:42:34.680 version of the show on rumble or on youtube leave a comment there i go looking over there sometimes
00:42:41.180 for comments and that's exactly where today's comment comes from actually i'm going to probably
00:42:46.180 read two because they're both the second one is just kind of fun um and they're on last week's show
00:42:51.160 with my friend cutie patootie grandma tracy wilson of the canadian coalition for firearms rights and we
00:43:00.700 were talking about the toronto sportsman show and how it was as busy as ever in spite of justin
00:43:07.900 trudeau's increasing crackdown on firearms rights in this country it was sort of a hopeful theme of the
00:43:14.820 show and she updated us on some of the things the ccfr is doing to fight back against justin
00:43:21.080 trudeau's gun grabs and scapegoating of the law abiding for the crimes happening in toronto and
00:43:29.060 montreal and edmonton and calgary and vancouver what's the common thread there oh progressive run
00:43:36.120 cities somehow it's the conservative gun owners problems if the bad guys are doing bad things in
00:43:43.200 progressive run cities and getting the benefit of liberal bail policies anyway someone writes to me
00:43:51.040 on my interview with tracy old albertin in fact says omg i hope i get my handgun rights back so i
00:44:01.740 can again buy sell and transfer my handguns i just want my property rights back really that's all it is
00:44:09.360 the government has arbitrarily decided that handgun owners
00:44:12.500 who have done nothing wrong must be held responsible for the actions of illegal handgun owners
00:44:21.300 that's like scapegoating the guy with a black car in bashaw alberta because a guy who stole a black car
00:44:33.760 ran over somebody in toronto that's the way that gun owners in this country are treated all the time by the
00:44:41.540 liberal government because if they can do this to 650 000 handgun owners in canada and not respect
00:44:49.460 their property rights they can do that to anyone for other personal property the government doesn't
00:44:55.280 like exactly exactly this is an issue that while it touches on handgun owners and firearms owners in
00:45:05.880 general this is an issue about property rights can the government arbitrarily outlaw your property
00:45:14.260 when you have done everything possible to own it legally should they be able to do that because
00:45:22.040 somebody somewhere who didn't do the things that you did to own the property legally did something
00:45:28.220 wrong because that's how handgun owners in this country are treated right now now in that interview
00:45:33.840 with tracy we poked fun at the toronto police because they famously gave that piece of advice
00:45:39.680 in a town hall basically telling uh vehicle owners in toronto to leave your keys in a place
00:45:50.120 where it would be easy for the thieves to get them so that it would be easy for them to steal your car
00:45:57.540 without i don't know disrupting your beauty sleep
00:46:02.180 i guess um or so that you wouldn't be subject to a home invasion you i suppose to just assume the
00:46:10.200 benevolence of people who would be willing to carjack you or break into your home your castle
00:46:17.720 while you sleep to steal your property you should just assume that they're they're only there for the
00:46:23.860 car in nothing else anyway we we made fun of him and so are you people in the comment section
00:46:30.660 shonk 420 says they won't steal my car a 2005 ford focus wagon that i've hauled pigs and chickens in
00:46:42.680 open the passenger door and the trash falls out but there ain't nothing wrong with the radio
00:46:47.660 you know who knows yeah i there's no accounting for taste maybe the thief has some livestock that
00:46:58.200 they need moved to i don't know have you seen how some of these thieves live these homeless encampments
00:47:05.600 i think they'd happily take your 2005 ford focus chicken hauler and use it for untold illicit
00:47:18.040 purposes maybe i don't know well everybody that's the show for tonight thank you so much for tuning
00:47:26.380 in i'll see everybody back here in the same time in the same place next week and as always
00:47:31.060 don't let this government tell you that you've had too much to think