The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program ｜ Guests： Dr. Frank Tian Xie & Dr. Timothy Ball ｜ 9⧸19⧸19

00:00:00.000 Hello, podcasters. It's Glenn Beck, along with Pat Gray, who's been filling in for

00:00:04.260 Stu, who is on vacation this week. And we got another great show for you.

00:00:09.260 We started with the economy. How do you feel about the economy?

00:00:12.960 Oh, my gosh. Yeah.

00:00:14.480 That's a real pick-me-up.

00:00:16.100 So confident in the economy.

00:00:18.700 Yeah, we start with explaining what's really going on with something that no one is talking

00:00:24.280 about, at least in real people terms. We have that on today's program.

00:00:29.740 Also, is the trade war affecting us or China?

00:00:33.700 We have an expert on who was born and went to school in Beijing and has, like, way over

00:00:40.960 schooled himself. But he's saying, you don't understand, China's on the brink of disaster.

00:00:47.460 That plus, do we talk to the 12th Imam today? I know we talked about Ilhan Omar. The 12th

00:00:54.780 Imam may check in on that. A couple of amazing stories on that front.

00:00:59.740 Plus, global warming. The guy who actually proved the hockey stick was total garbage. 0.99

00:01:07.500 Wait until you hear how they made that hockey stick. 0.97

00:01:11.240 All on today's podcast.

00:01:20.700 You're listening to The Best of the Glenn Beck Program.

00:01:24.640 There is a couple of things that you really need to be aware of today. And I want to take

00:01:38.920 you through them. If you'll give me 25 minutes today, I promise you, you're going to get more

00:01:44.320 out of those 25 minutes than anything else you can do today. Let me tell you about something

00:01:50.560 that is happening with the banks and the Federal Reserve that nobody is talking about. Yeah,

00:01:56.780 they're talking about it on CNBC, but they're talking about it in a way that it doesn't matter

00:02:01.320 to you. This matters a lot. On Tuesday, this week, the Federal Reserve announced that it would

00:02:12.860 offer banks an overnight repo operation. Now, repo is Wall Street jargon for repurchase agreement.

00:02:23.300 Now, when's the last time the Federal Reserve was repurchasing things from banks? Do you remember?

00:02:33.160 It was TARP. It allowed the Federal Reserve to go in and buy with your money, go and buy different

00:02:43.940 assets that were failing. Now, repo is a mechanism for short term, generally a one day loan. This is

00:02:54.060 something that the banks, they have to have a certain amount of cash in the bank overnight. And so

00:03:02.420 sometimes they'll just put assets up for sale, and they'll say, we need the money for the overnight.

00:03:07.200 And then the next day, they repurchase the same asset back. Now, during the Tuesday repo operation,

00:03:16.600 the Fed pledged $55 billion worth of funds available to the banks, and the banks could sell the Fed their

00:03:24.120 assets. Now, they were selling mortgage-backed securities or U.S. Treasury bonds.

00:03:32.420 And that way, the banks would have the cash. On Tuesday, the repo was oversubscribed by more than

00:03:40.660 $5 billion. That means the bank showed up asking for cash, more cash than the Fed thought that they

00:03:48.680 would even need. And that number was out by $5 billion. And so they thought, okay, well, there might be a

00:03:55.080 bigger problem here. So Wednesday, now remember, they haven't done this once in 10 years, they haven't

00:04:01.160 done this since the collapse of the market. So the next day, Wednesday, they did it twice, or they did

00:04:09.480 it a second time. This time, they said, okay, we're going to come to the table with $75 billion.

00:04:15.540 So if anybody needs money tonight, we'll we have $75 billion. Well, this time, the banks showed up and

00:04:23.780 they needed an additional $12 billion over the 75. Now, yesterday, the Fed chairman Powell, he announced

00:04:33.940 a quarter point cut in the interest rate. So he's lowering the interest rate. And we're going to have

00:04:40.940 to get to that at some point. But he also said they'd do another round of repos last night for

00:04:49.080 another $75 billion. So they haven't done this since 2008. They've done it now three days in a row.

00:04:58.860 That tells you something is wrong. This is the first time since 2009, the Federal Reserve have stepped

00:05:06.600 into the banking sector and offered cash. Second, the amount is really significant. The banking sector

00:05:18.600 just asked the Federal Reserve to inject $200 billion into the banks for just operating capital.

00:05:28.340 That's what this is, is operating capital. Overnight lending is bank to bank, usually.

00:05:36.120 And it runs a few billion dollars a day across the banking sector. So, you know, Bank of America

00:05:42.540 can call JP Morgan and say, Hey, can you just, can you just, I want to swap some assets for some cash?

00:05:49.280 Do you have some extra cash that you don't need tonight just to make sure that, you know,

00:05:53.020 we're stable overnight. And usually it's bank to bank. This is the banks calling the other banks

00:05:58.720 and the banks are like, I don't have any money. I'm going myself to the Fed.

00:06:02.260 Now, the third reason the Fed stepped in here was to control the interest rates and ensure that

00:06:09.020 the Fed's target interest rate of 2% was maintained. Now, since the banks lend money to each other all

00:06:16.020 the time, Bank A needs some cash on hand to cover a given market position or to ensure it meets its

00:06:22.880 cash reserve requirement set by the federal government or the Fed. So Bank B agrees to lend the money by

00:06:29.980 purchasing the assets from Bank A with an agreement that Bank A will buy those same assets back

00:06:35.460 at a future date, most likely in the morning at the same price plus a fee.

00:06:40.260 The banks do this all the time.

00:06:43.400 And they do it at the Fed's interest rate, their target interest rate. As of yesterday, that was 1.75%. Now, the funny

00:06:53.680 thing about the free market is the free market will tell you what's really going on. So what is the price

00:07:00.960 of money right now with the banks? The Federal Reserve says it should be 1.75%. That's the interest that they

00:07:09.160 would pay to borrow money. However, the interest rates at the bank due to the free market where the

00:07:18.360 banks were like, look, I don't have the money. How much more? How out of whack was the 1.75% set by

00:07:28.440 the Fed? It was only off by 500%. They were asking 10% fees to loan to the other bank for sometimes 12 to 18

00:07:43.860 hours. So that's why the Fed stepped in because they're like, whoa, whoa, whoa, what is going on

00:07:49.920 here? This is a sign that the banks are very risk averse, much more risk averse than the Fed

00:07:59.860 thinks they should be. Now, if the hairs aren't standing up on the back of your neck yet, they

00:08:05.400 should be. This sort of exercise is exactly what happened to Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns in

00:08:11.920 2007. But it's happening with now the only six banks that we have. The Fed stepping into the market to

00:08:21.100 give more cash unannounced three days in a row screams something is very wrong. There is a massive lack of

00:08:32.120 cash at hand. We're also already in a very loose and cheap money environment with

00:08:41.760 really super low interest rates and trillions in cash that has just been printed and injected in

00:08:49.140 the market by the way of quantitative easing. The fact that the banks need $75 billion of extra cash

00:08:57.460 every day, day after day, is a sign that something is dramatically wrong. Now, here's what we don't

00:09:06.640 know. We don't know why the banks need this much liquidity this quickly. It could be that they just

00:09:15.500 are covering short positions on bonds or energy derivatives that need to be covered given the

00:09:20.840 recent spike in oil. Could be caused by Aramco. We don't know. It could be banks using capital in the

00:09:28.460 short term to cover reserve requirements as part of a quarterly audit. Or it could be many of these banks

00:09:35.760 have overseas investments in stocks and real estate and futures market that are now taking losses and

00:09:41.920 they need cash to cover their margin calls overseas. The truth is, we won't know until the banks are

00:09:51.000 audited sometime in the fourth quarter. Anytime the Federal Reserve is stepping directly into markets to

00:09:59.560 inject cash. Something has gone very wrong somewhere in the gears of this very complex machine that

00:10:08.740 grinds our economy. One day it could be administrative error or market timing of a set of bonds maturing and

00:10:16.320 they need to be paid off or refinanced. Two days in a row indicates that it's a little more than that,

00:10:21.980 probably covering some short or some, dare I say it, I hate to even use this word, derivative position

00:10:29.360 that many investment banks were in in the crumbling of 2008. And they're in again. But three days in a row?

00:10:40.260 $75 billion a day of new cash needed by U.S. banks? This hasn't happened since the financial crisis.

00:10:48.840 That's banks telling us something is wrong. It's probably more than just a warning sign, more

00:10:55.840 like an exit sign. Get off on this off-ramp.

00:11:02.240 Now here's what's worse. Trump suggests that we need to move the interest rate to zero or negative.

00:11:10.740 This is the worst possible thing we could do right now. It would fuel more speculation and

00:11:19.840 give a bigger bubble on Wall Street. It would also cause trillions of dollars that Europe is now sending

00:11:27.920 our way. And they're putting it all in our stock market and our U.S. treasuries.

00:11:35.340 If we move our interest rate to zero or negative, it would take all of that money and ship it back

00:11:45.380 overseas into Europe and Asia and the Middle East. The more likely Fed response will be more bailouts

00:11:54.020 overnight and nobody will talk about it. Without the formal quantitative easing, they just give this

00:12:00.280 money to the banks. We are printing money to bail out the banks again. And the last time the banks were

00:12:08.240 doing this to shore up their balance sheets was 2008. It was a warning sign then that we talked about

00:12:15.760 and very few people recognized it as the time. I'm warning you again.

00:12:25.720 Please recognize this warning signal this time around.

00:12:30.720 Hey, it's Glenn. And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray

00:12:45.960 Unleashed. His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

00:12:50.820 So, uh, what do we do?

00:12:53.220 Yeah, that's what Pat asked right when we, right when I went into the commercial,

00:12:56.680 he just looked at me and went, and so then what, um, I have been saying for a while, uh,

00:13:05.120 get out of debt, pay your debt down, um, uh, reduce the footprint of your, of your life.

00:13:14.880 Um, we have another sign. You know, I talked to Mark Stanford, Sanford last night and Mark,

00:13:21.960 I got him on and I'm like, why are you running, dude? What are you doing? We are running against

00:13:27.520 Elizabeth Warren and, uh, we don't need a challenge right now. And I, I appreciate him. I really

00:13:36.120 respect him. I like him. He was, he was Cato's most conservative, fiscally conservative governor,

00:13:43.440 uh, in the United States. Um, he has stood for constitutional principles and he has stood against

00:13:51.280 the debt like crazy. However, can we not split the party? Because if we do, Elizabeth Warren will 1.00

00:14:00.600 be the next president of the United States. Almost every time, uh, a sitting president is primaried,

00:14:06.720 he loses the general election because it weakens him. Okay. So I talked to him yesterday. I had him

00:14:14.140 on, I had him on television last night and you should watch it. If you're a member of the blaze TV,

00:14:18.200 watch it. Um, uh, and I, I tried for the first eight minutes. I'm like, what are you doing?

00:14:24.200 Why would you do this? I mean, is, is trying to make a point, is that more important than winning

00:14:33.760 the election? Would you agree? Elizabeth Warren will be much worse. And he's like, Oh my gosh. He said,

00:14:40.640 Glenn, I am going to vote for Donald Trump. And I'm like, then what are you doing? Right. And he said,

00:14:47.480 and it took me about 15 minutes to really understand. And, and I think I really, I think

00:14:52.840 I believe him. I just don't think he should be running for president. You should do it another

00:14:57.220 way. Um, but he said, we must alert people. He said, no one in the democratic party, no one in the

00:15:06.420 Republican party, no one is even, there hasn't been the word deficit debt or economic catastrophe

00:15:13.700 even mentioned by any of these guys. And he's like, Glenn, I am seeing the exact same signs of 2008.

00:15:22.440 And we have to warn the American people. Now I agree with him. I just wish he wouldn't

00:15:30.100 be running against the president while doing it. Um, you know, and I talked to him and I said,

00:15:36.000 you know, you, you, I saw a headline in the, in the, um, New York times, Donald Trump's, uh,

00:15:43.320 biggest nightmare or, or, uh, you know, biggest foe, something like that. And I said, it was about,

00:15:50.480 you know, it's about you. Now I didn't get anywhere in that article about fiscal responsibility and a

00:15:56.740 coming economic collapse. What I got was you are a big challenge to Donald Trump. And they're just

00:16:03.120 using, I said, Mark, they will tear. If you were standing on the stage with 10 other Republicans,

00:16:08.720 you might be the first one. They tear apart. They're only holding you up to hurt Donald Trump,

00:16:14.320 but he went into some stats. And again, we can't kill the messenger. Um, we can question

00:16:23.320 how he's, you know, what horse he's riding in on to deliver this pony express, uh, wrong horse.

00:16:30.820 It's the wrong horse. It's the wrong horse, but we do have to talk about it. Um, there is,

00:16:39.180 uh, there are some other signs, not just this, but there are some other signs, uh, that he went into

00:16:45.520 that I've done my research and it's actually worse than what he thought. And every time, every time

00:16:54.080 this one number gets out of balance, it's our GDP to household wealth, every time that number gets

00:17:01.860 way out of balance, uh, we have a collapse. We have a real financial downturn, a big one.

00:17:09.080 Uh, for instance, uh, 2001, the GDP to household was like 400%. That's way out of whack. Uh, that means

00:17:19.220 corporations are making much more than households are. Uh, then in 2008, it was like 538, which

00:17:26.940 percent, which was way out of whack. It's 1100% now GDP to household wealth. Never ever before

00:17:38.780 have we seen this. Okay. We didn't, we had never seen 400% in 2001. We had never seen 500% at 2008.

00:17:47.360 It's 1100% out of whack. A correction is coming and most likely a massive correction. So please

00:18:00.080 be fiscally responsible, financially responsible, uh, and, uh, and prepare that and down the hatches.

00:18:12.080 This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

00:18:17.360 Hey, it's Glenn. And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray

00:18:29.780 Unleashed. His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast. You want to talk

00:18:35.600 about a guy who's done nothing with his life. Listen to this. Dr. Frank Z graduated from Peking

00:18:41.700 University in Beijing, China with a bachelor's degree in earth science. Then he was admitted

00:18:46.240 to graduate school of Peking university to study geochemistry and cosmochemistry. He then attended

00:18:52.660 Purdue university in West Lafayette, Indiana, and he pursued a doctorate in chemistry in the mid 1980s.

00:18:59.620 And then he continued to get an MBA in finance. Oh, and a PhD in marketing from the Robinson college of

00:19:06.860 business at Georgia state university. He's got no ambition. It's embarrassing. It really is.

00:19:13.020 It's embarrassing. I went to Yale for a semester and I'm a doctor. I have a doctorate, you know what

00:19:18.600 I mean? And I have a, I have a doctorate in humanities, which means I can treat any problem

00:19:23.520 in the entire human body. No, is that what that means? That's what it, pretty sure. That's what it

00:19:28.700 means. Uh, Dr. Z, how are you, sir? I'm fine. Thank you. How are you?

00:19:32.800 Very good. So I've been really concerned about the tariffs with China. I'm very concerned about

00:19:40.340 the China 2020 and 2025 plan. Uh, the things that they have been doing really since the year 2000 and

00:19:49.020 none of us have been paying attention to, uh, they, they are, uh, positioning themselves as a country of

00:19:58.520 great strength. But I read an article from you this last weekend that says, no, you think that

00:20:05.260 they are about to collapse. Yep. Yep. Tell me about it. Well, the, we, we know that the trade war that

00:20:14.860 the so-called trade war is actually, uh, president Trump's, you know, uh, action against China's unfair

00:20:23.160 trade practice, you know, have been, have been ongoing for about two years now, one and a half

00:20:28.400 years now. And it is working, as, uh, as I said, as you said, you know, it's working because, you

00:20:34.580 know, it targets directly to the weak spot of the Chinese communist regime. They have been exploiting,

00:20:41.540 you know, American, uh, American generosity, you know, and benefiting from trade with the U.S.

00:20:47.780 with huge surplus. And that is one thing. On the other hand, as you said, in their, uh, Made in China

00:20:54.760 2020-2025 program, uh, is actually, uh, state-sponsored, you know, uh, action to steal, uh, technologies

00:21:04.740 from the United States. It's not that China is trying to develop its own indigenous technology

00:21:10.400 to develop its own economy. That's fine. That's normal, right? That's what every country should

00:21:16.200 be doing. But in Chinese case, the regime actually, you know, has a systematic way of stealing,

00:21:22.820 you know, technologies from the U.S. and forcing U.S. companies, you know, to give them, to turn

00:21:29.000 over the technology to them in exchange for market access. Yeah, they have, they have, I mean, I think

00:21:34.860 this is the biggest robbery in human history, uh, that has been going on. They have been, they

00:21:40.640 have been stealing technology and really, uh, raping the United States and the rest of the 0.62

00:21:46.900 world for this technology. But I have read that China is not in the position. We used to think

00:21:52.980 China, well, they're never going to be able to make anything quality. And they've also not been 1.00

00:21:58.000 able to, um, uh, take that technology because they have a theft mentality, not a creation mentality

00:22:05.340 that they're not going to be able to, uh, do anything on their own. And I've read recently

00:22:09.900 that that's not true, that they have, they have improved many of the products and many of the

00:22:16.700 things themselves and are not in the same position as they were 20 years ago. Do you agree with that?

00:22:24.440 Uh, to a degree. I think they are, they are making progress towards quality, you know,

00:22:29.880 uh, uh, uh, do you, uh, made it, made their products more durable, but, uh, but still it

00:22:35.460 still lacks the, uh, the precision and, uh, let's say the, uh, the long-term quality of

00:22:42.280 American products or Japanese products. So we, we have this trade war going on and, um, I'm

00:22:50.600 very concerned what it's doing to our economy, but you say that this is almost suicidal, uh, for

00:22:57.580 the Chinese because while we can replace those products, you know, at a higher rate, they don't 1.00

00:23:04.940 replace the products from, from coming from America. Uh, one day, I don't think they, uh,

00:23:11.740 we're paying a much higher rate, you know, maybe we can see slightly higher rate, you know, in the

00:23:17.640 beginning and, but in the long run or even the midterm, midterm, uh, run, you know, we'll see, uh,

00:23:24.200 the price not going to be rising on the rise. I've seen, as we have seen over the one and

00:23:29.780 a half years, the, we haven't seen the inflation in this country yet, you know, we don't have,

00:23:35.040 we don't see that. That's because in China, the, the made in China, this war factory, 0.96

00:23:40.860 their, the rate, wages, it has gone up so fast, so, so much now because the Chinese government 0.97

00:23:48.020 basically imprinted tons of money, you know, lots of money to inflate, uh, uh, to inflate

00:23:53.980 the currency and making, uh, making the economy look good and to stimulate the economy. But

00:24:01.860 the people's wages are, they are actually the, the real actual wages that is going down. But

00:24:06.660 on the surface, at least in Chinese currency, RMB, renminbi, you know, uh, they seem to be

00:24:13.020 making more and the cost more. The, actually the cost of labor is, is increasing. Now the

00:24:19.020 China is not as competitive as the Vietnam or Bangladesh or India because, uh, because 0.85

00:24:25.940 of rising inflation over there. So in that, since those, uh, were factories, you know,

00:24:32.780 plans are actually relocating. The supply chain is moving to Vietnam, to Indonesia or India

00:24:39.380 or other countries, Southeast Asian countries. So the price that we can anticipate in this 0.56

00:24:45.580 country, I don't think it's going to go up that much, for one. You're right, you're absolutely

00:24:50.780 right that, you know, we can buy things, you know, that can replace Chinese imports, but

00:24:56.500 China cannot replace American imports. They depend on us, um, some, uh, things that are as high, 0.93

00:25:03.380 as those high-tech, uh, technologies, communication, computers, you know, satellite, airplane components,

00:25:09.780 all those high-tech stuff, as well as the low-tech stuff, you know, agriculture products. Nobody

00:25:15.780 can produce, you know, so much soybeans or pork bellies or corns as cheap and as good as American

00:25:23.220 farmers. And China needs that. You know, the, the, the pork price has gone up so much in China.

00:25:29.780 Now people are really complaining. Right. And they, they just released a huge amount of pork

00:25:36.020 reserves that they had. I didn't even know people had pork on reserve, but they have freezers,

00:25:41.300 you know, I don't know where, uh, thousands of them, and they had to release emergency pork reserves.

00:25:48.260 Right. But they call it a strategic pork reserve. I think this is ridiculous. You know,

00:25:51.700 you have strategic petroleum reserve. That's fine. But pork reserve, I mean, you can't storage

00:25:56.900 that the pork for too long. Right. I don't know the exact. Well, I don't know. I mean, I,

00:26:02.180 I'm hoping the United States has pudding reserves because if things go to hell in a handbasket,

00:26:06.740 I still need my pudding. Um, but that's a, that's a different story. Um, their, their, um,

00:26:14.180 banking sector is shady. Their, uh, their GDP report is shady. I have always heard that they can't

00:26:23.620 survive under 8% GDP and they're around four, according to their own reporting.

00:26:30.660 Exactly. So that 8% is a false. I can tell you that the old Chinese economic numbers, you know,

00:26:38.180 don't, you can't trust them. Okay. So, so what does this mean if they are indeed this unstable?

00:26:44.980 What does this mean? What is coming to China? What, and how will that affect the rest of the world?

00:26:51.300 Well, if this is so unstable, it's because they falsify those numbers, including the

00:26:56.100 correct numbers that the consumer price index, the CPI numbers, and the bad, bad numbers in banks,

00:27:03.380 and they, they cannot sustain that anymore. And now with the, the factories, the supply chains

00:27:10.340 moving out of China, the unemployment is going up. And, uh, we believe that there are tens of

00:27:16.020 millions of people being out of jobs right now. But isn't, isn't this why they have the social

00:27:22.100 credit scores? They work so hard to get that into place by 2020 because they're afraid of their own

00:27:28.580 population. And they knew if they started to go unstable, they would have to have a way to control

00:27:35.860 their populations or there, there might be a revolution.

00:27:39.540 Exactly. You're exactly, absolutely right. Yeah. They are afraid of people. I think that's

00:27:44.980 really the, it's the regime. It's not the Chinese people, it's the regime that's against its own 0.63

00:27:50.820 people. They want to use this technology, you know, face recommendations, or, you know,

00:27:56.420 those AI technologies to monitor people, the social credit scores you have, you know, you,

00:28:02.340 if you are on their blacklist, if you are like a democracy activist, or religious, you know,

00:28:08.500 religious leaders, or religious, religious people, you know, people, if a Falun Gong practitioners,

00:28:13.620 is of underground Christians, Tibetans, you know, Uyghurs, you know, you cannot, because they put on a 1.00

00:28:21.220 social credit score on you, and in the system, they can recognize you where you are on the street.

00:28:26.020 You know, you cannot be, you cannot freely buy, you know, airplane tickets, or, you know, high-speed train

00:28:34.500 tickets. So you're restricted. Let me ask you this question, and I'm running out of time, and I thank you

00:28:41.060 so much for your comments today. But if I have heard that even though Xi is now in the Constitution

00:28:51.540 as a ruler for life, that he is losing a lot of support in the Communist Party, because things are

00:28:59.860 not going well with the economy, and things in Hong Kong are getting out of hand, and he was the guy who

00:29:06.420 said, I won't let any of this happen. Is there a chance that President Xi is in trouble

00:29:11.780 from a for a coup or anything like that? Yeah, it's very likely. I think it is that the power

00:29:17.060 struggle is ongoing right now, and those hotliners, you know, the Maoists, you know,

00:29:22.500 the hotline, you know, communists, they are actually, you know, putting a lot of pressure on him.

00:29:27.300 You know, they accuse him of the failure of the trade war, and the problem situations in Hong Kong,

00:29:33.940 and the downwards by aspiring economy, and there is a struggle there. I think the one only option

00:29:40.980 for him is if he had the guts, like Gorbachev, you know, or Yeltsin in Russia, he should really abolish

00:29:48.820 this party, and it's not over. But otherwise, this is the whole economy, and the party itself,

00:29:54.900 the regime, the communist rule, are all going down the drain, as we see it.

00:30:00.660 All right. Dr. Frank Z, thank you so much. Professor of the University of South Carolina.

00:30:06.340 You can find his article, China Faces Economic Collapse, Decoupling from World Markets.

00:30:13.140 It is a fascinating read. Thank you very much, doctor. Appreciate it.

00:30:16.900 And if that guy would get himself an education, imagine how good he'd be.

00:30:21.700 You know what I mean? Just spend a couple more years in school.

00:30:24.580 Too lazy. Obviously lazy.

00:30:26.660 It would take me like 600 lifetimes to get all of that education.

00:30:33.140 This is the best of the Glenn Beck Program.

00:30:46.020 Hey, it's Glenn. And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

00:30:50.660 His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

00:30:54.900 The chief science advisor of the International Climate Science Coalition.

00:31:00.180 A coalition would make you think that there's more than one scientist that disagrees with a global warming hysteria.

00:31:07.460 We know that's not true. There's total consensus on this.

00:31:11.220 Apparently, except for this guy, Dr. Timothy Ball. How are you, doc?

00:31:15.300 Thank you. And by the way, the use of the word consensus tells you that it's political.

00:31:22.340 There's no consensus in science. So that's wrong.

00:31:25.700 And by the way, you mentioned Obama's waterfront property.

00:31:29.060 You could argue that both he and Al Gore went around telling the world that sea level was going to rise,

00:31:33.940 which lowered the price of waterfront property, and they bought cheap.

00:31:37.700 That's right. It is Gore button Malibu. Yeah. Yeah.

00:31:41.540 But they got 12 years before we all die.

00:31:45.540 You know, I saw a story, doctor, that there that ran yesterday, I think from the BBC,

00:31:53.940 that showed that young people are having to go to now therapy sessions.

00:32:00.100 They're they're starting these group therapy sessions for people who are saying, I don't know how to plan for my life because we only have 12 years to live.

00:32:10.580 This is the most irresponsible and quite honestly, evil thing that I have seen.

00:32:17.200 You're freaking people out to the point to where they really, truly believe in 12 years we're all dead.

00:32:23.480 Yeah. And then you can add to that, that Greta Thunberg appearing before the U.N. yesterday.

00:32:30.840 It's just these are all examples of child abuse, because when you start using children to push, push your message,

00:32:37.140 and particularly a scientific message, it shows you that it's not that it's inappropriate.

00:32:43.000 It's purely political.

00:32:45.160 All right. So let's let's talk about a couple of things,

00:32:48.280 because I'm very concerned about Barack Obama's oceanfront property in his island.

00:32:54.440 I'm hoping that that island floats so it'll just go up and stay at the top of the glass.

00:32:59.540 But have we seen the sea levels rise anything like predicted?

00:33:07.180 No, the sea level rises are perfectly normal, well, well within natural increase.

00:33:14.240 And, of course, the most dramatic rise occurred about 9,000 years ago when the glaciers that had formed during the Ice Age,

00:33:22.400 the majority of them melted.

00:33:24.120 And that caused about a 450-foot increase in sea level in less than 5,000 years.

00:33:30.060 Since in the last 3,000 years, there has been a gradual, but very gradual, like 2 millimeters a year increase.

00:33:36.920 But that's, again, because the world's continued to warm out of the last ice age.

00:33:41.340 Yeah, so when all those glaciers, though, melt in, you know, Alaska and every place else, Greenland, we're all dead.

00:33:50.220 Yeah, but this is what they're doing.

00:33:53.380 They're taking the volume of ice in those glaciers, calculating how much water that is in volume,

00:34:00.760 and then adding that to the current sea level.

00:34:03.120 That's not the way it works at all, because as the ice melts, well, first of all,

00:34:10.340 at least three-quarters of the ice in Greenland and Antarctica is already below sea level.

00:34:15.780 So it won't change the level at all.

00:34:18.380 And then water expands when it freezes by about 7%, so you can take another 7% off of that.

00:34:26.000 Yeah, but you can't prove that with just a simple glass of water with ice in it.

00:34:29.780 No, of course not.

00:34:32.220 No, no, that's only something they would do in grade 8.

00:34:35.640 I mean, come on.

00:34:36.460 Right, right.

00:34:37.960 Yeah, but this is the simplistic things that they do.

00:34:43.260 As I said, just simply adding all that water to the current sea level

00:34:46.580 and then putting it out there, people like Al Gore.

00:34:50.100 They should be held legally liable for the scientific lives that they're telling.

00:34:54.840 I think for the lives that they are destroying as well.

00:34:58.660 I mean, this has become a religion, and it is frightening. 0.99

00:35:04.180 I don't know if you saw, but NBC is now taking your climate sins.

00:35:08.880 You can confess your climate sins to NBC.

00:35:14.380 For some reason, you would think that they're the high priest of this,

00:35:16.880 but I find this amazing.

00:35:18.860 If I went on there and said my sin is that I don't believe that humans are causing climate change,

00:35:24.900 is that a sin?

00:35:27.440 Yes, it is.

00:35:28.740 It is.

00:35:30.580 I mean, I believe that the climate is changing from anything that I can read.

00:35:36.520 I don't know if I buy into all of the numbers, because the numbers,

00:35:43.500 the way they have placed these weather stations is ridiculous.

00:35:48.160 Some of them are on roofs.

00:35:49.680 Some of them are in parking lots.

00:35:51.240 They don't have any in the mountains, if I'm not mistaken.

00:35:54.420 I mean, how do you know?

00:35:57.040 Well, we don't know.

00:35:58.300 And, of course, if you look at all of their predictions,

00:36:02.700 they're all based upon computer models that are built on inadequate data.

00:36:07.500 So the problem starts even with the data to build the computer models on.

00:36:11.800 Then when you run the computer models, they make predictions.

00:36:14.840 Well, the computer model is designed so that if you increase CO2,

00:36:19.440 the temperature will go up.

00:36:20.860 But that doesn't happen in nature.

00:36:22.980 In all the records we have, temperature increases before CO2.

00:36:26.520 So it's not surprising that if you program or ask the computer what happens if CO2 goes up,

00:36:35.500 they say, oh, the temperature goes up.

00:36:37.020 But that's not the reality.

00:36:38.420 And if you look at every single forecast with every computer model that's been made by the U.N.

00:36:44.340 since 1990, every single one of them has been wrong.

00:36:48.500 I mean, these are people that can't even forecast the weather for five days,

00:36:51.940 and yet they're telling you they know with absolute certainty what's going to happen 50 and 100 years from now.

00:36:58.580 Do you think we ever learn from the past?

00:37:00.980 I mean, they've been doing this since the 1970s,

00:37:03.300 and Paul Ehrlich, who is still, for some reason or another, considered an expert on this,

00:37:08.240 they've been wrong every time.

00:37:10.180 When does this end?

00:37:12.220 When do people finally say, you know, I think I'm being used?

00:37:15.740 Yeah, well, of course, Ehrlich created the first Earth Day, and he did it on April the 22nd in 1972.

00:37:24.780 Well, April 22nd happens to be Lenin's birthday, and that should tell you everything about what's going on here.

00:37:31.500 If you want to push and demand or force a world government,

00:37:36.940 all you've got to do is find something that threatens the whole globe and say,

00:37:40.660 look, no one nation can deal with it, therefore we need a global government to deal with it.

00:37:44.400 That's what's going on.

00:37:46.580 And as I said, Ehrlich is still out there, and despite, as you said,

00:37:50.720 all of the predictions he made on that original Earth Day in 1972, every one of them has been wrong.

00:37:56.880 And in fact, if you go down all of the items like desertification, deforestation, all the way down the list,

00:38:06.460 there's simply no evidence or data to support any of them.

00:38:10.340 I've gone through every single one.

00:38:12.900 In fact, I'm writing a book that I hope to get out soon where I take all of these issues and say,

00:38:17.740 well, where's your data?

00:38:19.360 There is no data.

00:38:20.960 Tell me about the data of a hockey stick, because you proved that the hockey stick was bogus.

00:38:28.460 The guy took you to court and then wouldn't produce any data to be able to defend it.

00:38:33.520 And you said, well, if it's bogus, I have to show you where your data is wrong.

00:38:38.060 So produce the data.

00:38:39.540 The judge threw the case out.

00:38:42.040 Yeah, well, what happened was, and I had three lawsuits, by the way,

00:38:46.440 and of course that raises questions about why am I picked out,

00:38:50.460 and the answer is because I'm qualified.

00:38:52.820 They can't say I'm not qualified, and also I can explain it in ways people can understand.

00:38:57.920 But in answer to your question, in the first IPCC report in 1990,

00:39:04.240 there was a graph drawn by a gentleman I had the privilege of working with by the name of Hubert Lamb.

00:39:10.600 And what it showed was a warm period around 1,000 AD that was warmer than it is today,

00:39:18.260 and then the temperature declined down to 1680 when it was much colder than it is today,

00:39:24.260 and then it's been warming since that time.

00:39:26.800 Now, that, of course, that warm period 1,000 years ago contradicted what they were saying.

00:39:33.740 They were saying that, oh, the world's warmer than it's ever been.

00:39:36.800 And people like me were saying, well, what about this diagram?

00:39:39.840 What about all this data and all the research that shows it was actually much warmer 1,000 years ago?

00:39:46.780 And so a professor by the name of David Deming, he said,

00:39:52.840 I got an email from somebody pushing the false global warming thing and said,

00:39:57.380 we've got to get rid of that medieval warm period.

00:40:00.220 So they literally rewrote history.

00:40:02.380 The hockey stick was a deliberate creation using a couple of tree ring records,

00:40:07.780 which we were told not to use, that showed that there was no temperature increase for about 1,000 years,

00:40:16.780 and then suddenly a dramatic upturn, the blade of the hockey stick in the 20th century.

00:40:22.280 And, of course, that diagram, just the picture of it, stuck in people's minds,

00:40:29.720 symbolism of it, oh, look, dramatic warming in the 20th century.

00:40:34.160 This is proof humans are causing it.

00:40:36.240 The whole hockey stick was false.

00:40:39.060 And, by the way, just to show you how false it was,

00:40:42.220 the handle of the hockey stick is tree rings.

00:40:45.980 The blade is instrumental records.

00:40:48.500 You never, ever in science put two lines on a graph

00:40:53.560 with completely different sources of information.

00:40:56.380 Oh, that's amazing.

00:40:57.180 Wow, I didn't even know that.

00:40:58.320 I didn't either.

00:40:58.760 Wow, that's fascinating.

00:41:00.540 So we're talking to Dr. Timothy Ball.

00:41:04.500 He's an environmental consultant, policy advisor at the Heartland Institute,

00:41:08.700 and he's also a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

00:41:16.740 You say there's a connection between global warming and eugenics.

00:41:19.580 What is it?

00:41:21.260 Well, this has always been a debate that's going on,

00:41:24.660 is the extent to which humans and human behavior is controlled by the environment.

00:41:29.680 The whole idea that we have a free will and we're independent of environmental pressures and so on has long been a debate.

00:41:40.160 The reality is there's a philosophical contradiction in the academic world between saying that on the one hand that we're just another animal and on the other hand that we're completely independent of nature and are not controlled by it at all.

00:41:56.000 And so that's, of course, what this is all about.

00:42:00.900 And, of course, eugenics, that is the way that people are born, the number of children that people have and so on, 0.94

00:42:10.840 are all, for humans, for the most part, just like all animals, environmentally dictated.

00:42:18.060 Doctor, I want to ask about the ice melt that they talk about all the time, that the Arctic ice has melted, you know, a certain percent more than it ever has before in history.

00:42:29.600 We've got more frequent tornadoes than we've ever had, fires than we've ever had, floods than we've ever had.

00:42:36.300 How do you respond to all that?

00:42:37.560 Well, first of all, the glaciers are melting, and they've been melting for the last 18,000 years because we're coming out of an ice age.

00:42:47.760 The argument that the number of hurricanes, tornadoes, and all the rest of it have increased is consistently shown to be wrong.

00:42:55.340 There was a study just came out about a week ago and showing that the number of hurricanes has, in fact, decreased.

00:43:01.880 You see the same thing with the fires in the Amazon.

00:43:05.620 There were less fires over the last 30 years than they had in the previous 100 years, but that's not what you're being told.

00:43:14.040 They want to play up that this is part of the global warming issue, but also added to that, of course, is that Bolsonaro, the president of Argentina, is not buying into the climate nonsense.

00:43:29.000 So it's an attack on him, an attack on the whole idea in general.

00:43:33.680 So what's going on in the world right now is well within any long-term natural variability.

00:43:41.160 And if I tell you, they keep saying, oh, we're going to get two degrees warmer, and that's going to be the end of the world.

00:43:46.880 For the last 10,000 years, it has been two degrees warmer than today for 9,000 of them.

00:43:56.160 Wow. That's amazing.

00:43:58.980 Yeah. Well, you see, this is what you do with climate.

00:44:01.700 You just pick a period of record that proves what you want it to prove.

00:44:05.880 They're really good at that, though. They're really, really good at that.

00:44:08.480 Oh, yeah. It's called cherry picking. And, of course, what I've just done is give you the temperature record over the last 10,000 years, and it completely dispels what they're saying for the last 1,000 years.

00:44:22.880 But wait a minute. I think what everybody is wondering right now is, why do you hate polar bears so much?

00:44:30.580 I mean, they're on the ice shelf. They're ready to die. The poor little ice is about to flip over, and they're going to drown.

00:44:37.160 Yeah. And the babies. The babies. Polar bears are going to drown. 0.95

00:44:40.700 Yeah.

00:44:41.020 That's even more heart-wrenching.

00:44:43.120 Well, polar bears won't drown, and the reason they won't, and by the way, I know this because I spent five years of search and rescue in the Arctic, so I'm very familiar with polar bears.

00:44:51.200 But they've got two levels of fur. They've got a very short fur close to the skin, which is an incredibly effective insulator,

00:44:59.780 to the point where I worked with scientists that were taking infrared photographs of polar bears, and they don't show up on the photograph because they don't give out any heat.

00:45:10.720 That's one sweet jacket. Think of that. A polar bear jacket. That'd be great. Anyway.

00:45:15.700 Yeah. And the longer hair is hollow, so they float. It floats.

00:45:20.560 They can swim.

00:45:21.840 Yeah, they can swim extremely well. In fact, I personally have seen polar bears 80 miles offshore.

00:45:27.780 Yeah, but I have to tell you, okay, yeah, whatever, but that, I mean, they have moved down into Canada because they're just trying to-

00:45:35.700 Find food.

00:45:36.520 Find food. They're going away from their natural Arctic location.

00:45:42.700 No location.

00:45:43.360 Hunting grounds.

00:45:44.300 Yeah.

00:45:44.900 Because there's no seals for them to eat up there anymore.

00:45:47.240 Right.

00:45:47.520 Because the ice is melting.

00:45:48.380 So they're coming down.

00:45:50.260 And, of course, once the ice goes out in the summertime, there are no seals for them to eat.

00:45:56.620 So they move on the land, and they're very, very good foragers.

00:46:00.360 They survive extremely well on the land, and you could go up around Churchill and see them on the land,

00:46:07.060 where they come ashore and have their young when they're on land.

00:46:12.700 So all of these things are taken out of context and simply are false.

00:46:17.840 The polar bear numbers, and I've worked with a couple of the people.

00:46:23.300 Her name's, forget my name, Crockford, Susan Crockford.

00:46:26.780 Oh, yeah.

00:46:27.000 She's the world expert on polar bears.

00:46:29.000 And she's telling me that, and I know this, that the polar bear numbers in most of the herds are increasing.

00:46:34.860 Yeah.

00:46:35.220 So thank you very much, Dr. Timothy Ball.

00:46:37.360 The Blaze Radio Network.

00:46:41.860 On Demand.

The Glenn Beck Program - September 19, 2019

Best of the Program ｜ Guests： Dr. Frank Tian Xie & Dr. Timothy Ball ｜ 9⧸19⧸19

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript