Best of the Program ｜ Guests： Dr. Frank Tian Xie & Dr. Timothy Ball ｜ 9⧸19⧸19
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
151.58714
Summary
Glenn Beck and Pat Gray discuss what's really going on with something that no one is talking about, at least in real people terms. Also, is the trade war affecting us or China? We have an expert on who was born and went to school in Beijing and has, like, way over-schooled himself. Plus, do we talk to the 12th Imam?
Transcript
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?
00:00:18.700
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.
00:00:33.700
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.
00:01:07.500
Wait until you hear how they made that hockey stick.
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.
00:06:43.400
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
00:11:02.240
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.
00:12:53.220
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
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.
00:18:17.360
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
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
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
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,
00:23:40.860
their, the rate, wages, it has gone up so fast, so, so much now because the Chinese government
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
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
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,
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
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
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.
00:30:26.660
It would take me like 600 lifetimes to get all of that education.
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.
00:31:45.540
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.
00:32:45.160
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,
00:33:24.120
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.
00:33:53.380
They're taking the volume of ice in those glaciers, calculating how much water that is in volume,
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.
00:34:18.380
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.
00:34:32.220
No, no, that's only something they would do in grade 8.
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.
00:35:04.180
I don't know if you saw, but NBC is now taking your climate sins.
00:35:14.380
For some reason, you would think that they're the high priest of this,
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,
00:35:30.580
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.
00:35:51.240
They don't have any in the mountains, if I'm not mistaken.
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,
00:36:22.980
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,
00:36:38.420
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.
00:37:00.980
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,
00:37:12.220
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.
00:37:46.580
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.
00:38:12.900
In fact, I'm writing a book that I hope to get out soon where I take all of these issues and say,
00:38:20.960
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.
00:38:42.040
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,
00:38:52.820
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,
00:39:26.800
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.
00:40:02.380
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.
00:40:39.060
And, by the way, just to show you how false it was,
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.
00:41:04.500
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.
00:41:21.260
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,
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.
00:42:37.560
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.
00:43:58.980
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.
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.
00:45:21.840
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-
00:45:36.520
Find food. They're going away from their natural Arctic location.
00:45:44.900
Because there's no seals for them to eat up there anymore.
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.
00:46:29.000
And she's telling me that, and I know this, that the polar bear numbers in most of the herds are increasing.