the following is a PBS election 2012 special presentation the it
the findings are blocked climate change
is happened in the last election for a few scenes details of the climate change
which we are eating climate change poses a growing
thank you there is a climate change a real but since then
a successful campaign has been waged to introduce down
about the science this message conspiracy to make a certain
case pp scientists enough money they'll find what you want to fight their
cooking
the data scientific malpractice do you think the science
is being hyped on global warming over a different yes
correspondent john hockenberry investigates the politics have gotten to
the point where people just don't want to listen to science
how did it happen all and who's behind it tonight
climate have died
the you chicago is now under
national security fact no-fly zone is in effect
something else and now
some the best mom and a number of all it was a pretty good weekend in Chicago
last spring the president was in town
along with the leaders of NATO's military alliance discussed threats to
global security and nuclear proliferation
terrors of police this a huge convention center the eyes of the world were
watching
whose your we came to Chicago but across town in a small hotel ballroom
the fate of the world was also on the agenda every
things will be revealed the eyes of the world might have missed this gathering
around your food job the message here is that man-made global climate change
you is a myth mom a hoax
you mean
this conference is an annual pilgrimage for the key skeptics
mom we came here to understand how they have made their views
a mainstream fact American politics they think of themselves as rebels
up against the biggest players in science government
in the media wind and solar are based on public fear
morning and weeks to review that is pretty much given up his followers in
addition
reporter on the street is it has become an issue some if you add up
all the resources I've our side of the debate
and all the resources the other side of the debate this is a David versus
Goliath story
you doing pretty well there are holdouts among the urban by coastal wheat
but I think we've won the debate with the american people in the heartland
the people who who get their hands dirty people who dig up stuff
gross stuff and make stuff for a living people have a closer relationship to
tangible reality
to stuff we need to keep being way on the site my ring the bell chairs a group
called the cooler heads coalition
on a team of skilled policy advocates driving
a remarkable turnaround that is already changed the US political landscape cool
warming isn't in fact accelerating effect has been known for 15
yes there's Christopher Monckton a big draw at these meetings who brings the
skeptics to their feet every time said
republican congressman James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin
vice chairman of the House Science Committee over
use my me treason against I have there's chris warner
from the Competitive Enterprise Institute his economic salvation this is
our way out
and James Taylor senior fellow at the Heartland Institute
organizer this gap this DVD
is in the years prior to 2007 the 2008 elections
we actually heard from many folks that we should tone it down on global warming
we should not talk about the issue because
the court of public opinion had already decided in and we were on the losing end
but we believe that if we present the case to the american people
and it resonates if they get it then now that's going to work its way up the
the political stepladder you've really change the game
on global warming I certainly hope so these political messengers rely on a
small group with outspoken scientific contrarians
like climatologist pat michaels the libertarian Cato Institute
every paragraph and even
willie soon as an astrophysicist who studies the Sun and stars
so you just bought a mechanism to transport anything
from the topics to the mom think they can both fit northern hemisphere
in southern and fred singer veteran scientist at these proceedings
he's a retired physicist once responsible for government weather
satellites
mean the same who tells PEOPLE the climate needs no help from worry humans
adjustable parameters clamor to me has become a non-issue
it's a phantom issue is nothing wrong with climate
it will change no matter what we do is get colder
it'll get warmer up we just have to wait a little
singer says he's dedicated to explaining his theories about global warming what
keeps you going
what's what's your motivation shoulda I like to see
good science being done and protected
I think I'm fighting here for scientific proof
that's important to me do you think the science is being hyped
on global warming or very differently yes
armed with that conviction this team a skilled political messengers and
contrarians
has certainly changed the game in just four years the number of Americans who
agree global warming is man-made
has dropped to about half I
it's a message that is inspiring a new generation of skeptics
I would like to I'm leaving a Sudanese scientists
payment I can have dedicated their lives team debunking
death families
so to speak once upon a time what these people call
a fallacy had another name the truth
the
the you heard of the charts within less than 50 years it'll be here
the so-called skeptic in 2006 the film an inconvenient truth told a disturbing
story
and galvanized public awareness about the climate and now to a new report on
global warming from a prestigious panel of scientists convened by the UN
new grim report out today from this comprehensive report in 2007 took it to
another level
get scientists from thirty nations concluded that global warming is
unequivocal and human activity is mostly the cause
countries went over it is the definitive report on global warming
and it's frightening I
call upon the Peace Prize laureate for 2007
I'll cool to clear UN scientists and former Vice President Al Gore would
share the Nobel Peace Prize
the cause had a consensus incredible leader
skeptics would take on both
I think al gore was probably the best thing that could happen to global
warming skeptics
from my perspective al gore was the perfect
proponent and leader of the global warming alarmists because he's very
politically divisive been controversial
I think it was his Tony matter he did at a certain point come across as
holier-than-thou
that's nothing about americans are not really big on holier than of
had is 82 the personalizing the attacks was part of an approach that was
immediately embraced an amplified by friendly media
ask is the former vice president getting of that plane
into a town car by the way not a hybrid be quite a failure to recycle aluminum
cans with the holocaust
he wants to be a super hero action figure
and my ring the bell was acting on a broad strategy he helped create more
than a decade ago
in this 1998 action plan
victory will be achieved it said when the public
recognizes uncertainties in climate science
today at the washington DC headquarters on the competitive
Enterprise Institute a free-market think tank you can see my ring the bells
philosophy proudly displayed on the walls
0 CI of those what we're fighting is the expansion
cover there are many pretexts for XP
go no opposing government action on climate change to defend
American freedom is a perfect fit we felt that
if you concede the science is settled and there's a consensus
you cannot there
the moral high ground has been seeded to the alarmists
so he had to go to work and break down this consensus yes and we did it because
we believed that the consensus was phony
we believed that the so-called global warming consensus
was not based on science but was a political consensus
which included a number scientists in 2009
agreement on global warming seen part of the solid wave enthusiasm that elected
Barack Obama i Barack Hussein Obama
two songs were with the changing of the guard in washington there was a
bipartisan call to action will be more sense if inevitability
speaker the president of the United States
the an idea that for years had struggled for attention in Congress
would get its moment of truth so why ask this Congress to send me legislation
the places a market-based cap on carbon the president back
the so-called cap-and-trade approach a system %uh regulations and financial
incentives
to eventually reduce the emission of carbon into the atmosphere
it seemed there was consensus
on climate change there was an uneasy consensus
but the people who
have always objected to change
had not yet really engaged
and because of the consensus because there was a sense
that there was going to be movement that galvanized
the action I love the people who oppose it the american people hadn't focused on
these issues
until it actually came to a vote in Congress on a bill to implement these
policies
today's hearing is on the soft consensus for taking action ran into the bitter
partisan divisions in Congress
congressional hearings on Capp in trade would become a stage where opposing
views would get equal time
a professor trade you just heard you talk to Michael crow cap-and-trade
lawmakers would call leading climate scientists and policymakers to make the
argument for action now
as the models very clear from an estimate that
that in fact where r in for bigger trouble wanna things that we've already
seen as many observed changes in the climate
global climate change is a serious threat to our national security
the skeptics had their own witnesses they testified that nothing was settled
rate and the global warming might actually be good for the planet food is
necessary
fed again carbon dioxide is what is plant food this plant food yep
the testimony of the skeptics argued for a timeout
there was enough uncertainty they said to justify delay
the right response to the known problem of global warming for a slide please
is to have the courage to do nothing but the fear of catastrophic
man-made global warming is mistaken this demonstration shows that the
oft-repeated mantra in washington called the science is settled
is not true at all if climate change skeptics had found a seat at the table
but the scientific consensus still had the momentum
when cap-and-trade came up for a vote in the house in 2009
it passed with 8 republicans on board
the KS pass
the waxman-markey cap-and-trade bill passed the House very narrowly
219 223 12 the members in the senate
who we're going to take it up in July went home for the fourth of July recess
and they got an earful from their constituents
you don't trust me I
rather for you yeah
for the Tea Party so of reining expansion of government and healthcare
plan
and the push for cap-and-trade
yeah 9
the people love this country will really not concerned one way or the other on
this issue
antilles economy started going south in 2008
was that an opportunity to push back on climate change the recession
it sure was I'm Tim Phillips president Americans for Prosperity
we here at Billings Montana what part did you play
we certainly did TV ads radio ads a social media
we did rallies events we launch something we called hot air
and we're sending the message to send to Bacchus and senator tax %uh
tester to vote no on this job-killing tax increasing cap-and-trade
be gotta hot air balloon for the ban on the side about this said
cap-and-trade means higher taxes lost jobs
less freedom and we'll all the country doing a bentsen and storing up
grassroots
at anger and frustration concern open trade will slow the economy
and cost american jobs Americans for Prosperity is well-financed campaign was
an aggressive one electric bill
adds that when after cap and trade policy can afford the cap-and-trade tax
star jobs and says the science was a hoax Congress should stop wasting our
money and focus on real problems
is time congress listen to the rest of us in the tea party's anti-tax anti-big
government message
you could now hear the skeptic mantra attack in climate science
and cap-and-trade in trade and taxiing America
tapping our children some tea party events global warming skeptics were a
big draw
me great pleasure to welcome Lord
month tho introduced like a professional wrestler
Christopher Monckton is a former British journalist who admits
he has no scientific qualifications no
we all met on a great battlefield all the new
7 wall but here whipping up the crowd he sees
indisputable expertise million Americans speaks
you have my word global warming can someone tell me what it is
altogether the holidays
all events like these fertilize the growing public doubt about climate
change that was beginning to register with senators
with widespread anxiety over a shrinking economy
cap-and-trade was tabled in the senate the momentum towards action on global
warming
was vanishing how to save ever wonder as an activist
on our side are you making a difference this look at cap-and-trade
January 2009 have across that was sixty votes in the Senate then speaker policy
with a fifty plus even jordy
and cap-and-trade was at the top of their agenda and in the end they were
being
you've said if we win the science argument
I think it's game set and matching why you wanna win the science argument
it the science of human is one I do think it would
on be a pull out the final underpinning I love this legislative effort in this
regulatory effort the left is undertaking
but diminish the credibility of the scientific consensus
inaction on climate change grinds to a halt
at a conference in Long Island we witnessed how the skeptics build their
message up/down
move we once again saw Fred singer
congress' hope for really more medical doctors delivering his message to a
group of physicians who seemed eager to hear
0 roaming there hasn't been any was shipped bull trend
essentially getting old warming trend in the last 10 years there hasn't been a
warning
we don't know why that is but one doesn't see any
warming in the observations this simply is no trend
no warming in the last ten years no long-term trend
climate sciences would say that's playing games with the data
prop you can if you are very carefully select
the endpoints view our time series where the starting month in the ending month
in income up with maybe you come up with something that shows no
no warming in a sense what Deshler is saying is that you can do this at home
on a complex charred depending on the beginning points
axe and ending points why you can select the trend line that does indeed show
temperature going down
could I pick ten years have world history and
show a climate cooling polled
did you could totally do that in fact you could take the entire
time in history that we have in the instrumental record and you could find
cooling trends
are every 10 years cooling trends between 1958 in 1969
1969 in 1978 1978 and 1987 and so on I'm
scientists have a name for this they call it
going down the up escalator you pick the endpoints
and you could find any particular year as part of a cooling yo
factually the whole thing is moving up 0 if you look at all the data
it's quite clear that the warming is continuing
to the 2000's was the warmest decade on record
the 1990s was the warmest decade before that the 1980s before that
and most diverse in the field kinda side six packs but we can't be sure
weeks back debt the 2010 will be warmer than the 2000 of
against the backdrop of all the pressure from skeptics group congress ordered a
comprehensive review of climate change research
by the National Academy of Sciences the findings came back even stronger on
human-caused climate change
and a subsequent study showed ninety-seven percent active climate
scientists agree
what settled here on Climate Change virtually every place on earth is
warming up
hand people who've tried to go back and scrub the data
because their mistake with the way they're making these measurements
they've
call concluded no the people who are doing this work at the key places around
the world
her dream with each other what's the bottom line
on human-caused global warming I raise my hand at a high school science class
and you're the teacher
are humans causing the global warming were saying assurance
mostly yeah scientists are trying to shoot it down all the time in
he years and years and years nobody's been able to
so at some point you have to say maybe it's right
here's what the National Academy of Sciences report actually says
climate change is occurring and is largely caused by human activities
and poses a significant risk for a broad range of human and natural systems
you say that's false yes false
false and if most of the climate scientists
believe that statement they're deluded
yes and you're seeing something they're not seeing yes
so it's 97 percent of them and one EU
oh well you've reported that way if you like but I don't think that's the way it
works
this hundreds of us hundreds thousands of us
look 31,000 scientists and engineers
signed a statement to the contrary to the what you just read that organ
petition
yes the 14-year-old petition is not exactly an exclusive club
a Bachelor of Science degree is all it takes to get you on the list
this document skeptics claim counters the scientific consensus on global
warming
out now where they all scientists yes
one-third of them have PHD's book they're not specialists
in climate although some were celebrities and
right from it's a time-honored tactic by the skeptics
authentic looking documents and reports that don't stand up to independent
scrutiny
singer also signed the Oregon petition and this is not his first time going up
against accepted science
was the science around chloro-fluorocarbons
hyped the signs are on second hand smoke
hyped the signs around the ozone layer
hyped going back 10 15 20 years i'm happy to discuss all of these
since I've been deeply involved in all these topics a to mention
let me start with secondhand smoke fred singer
is I think professional contrarian when I was in graduate school I worked on
stratospheric ozone depletion
and Fred would call me when I was in grad school and talking about how he
didn't think humans were
depleting ozone and before that he had real questions about whether humans are
causing acid rain
and he does didn't think that nuclear winter was a
super sound science and he
really criticize the work connected secondhand smoke
to to health impacts and now he doesn't
think global warming is an issue al gore making his case so is global warming
factor fiction
but let's get to it but Fred singers case was bolstered
when in November of 2009 the skeptics got a break
that would put climate scientists on the defensive
also by results it's the fraud stupid oversimplified
that and parents can to keep skeptics made the most
locker room some stolen email erupted out of more than a thousand
act emails which included scientists internal conversations about global
temperature days people have already been revealed as not having any
honor now they're being revealed despite not having some issues suspicious
seeming
emails taken out of context would become Climategate
a stream even 09 subsequent investigations would find no tampering
with data
West impacted these emails would leave of signs
even the lady in the supermarket has heard of the Climategate emails that
purport to show the site is safe
fabricated eight-hour manipulate data and that's the whole idea global warming
has been proven to be a hoax
that is completely ridiculous continuing to use those
emails as evidence that global warming is not real
is inaccurate by continuing to use those emails to slander the scientific
reputation
not only those individual scientists butterfield as a whole
is irresponsible must documents and internal
emails comin home Katharine Hayhoe personally felt the effects Climategate
a climate scientist at Texas Tech in the Panhandle
she is the lead author of the federal research report detailing the impact of
global warming in the US
email sorry reviews remains the old he spends every Sunday in the church where
her husband preachings are disbursed maybe some other since we were this high
think the perception is often a climate scientist are
got the street having liberals out to Sac all the money I love the average
person in
and use it all to find all this research how much of this is a part of your
worldview my face is integral to who I am and that's what defines me not what I
do
on a day-to-day basis and so when I said it the planet I feel as if I'm setting
something a guy create
after she wrote a chapter on climate change for a book on environmental
policy
a private group suddenly requested her emails
just before Christmas this past year I got my first at Freedom of Information
Act request
and it was a bit of a shock the charges that you use taxpayers money
to engage in your personal activism about climate change
every single professor when invited to write submitted chapter 4
an edited volume 2 published by Academic Press
pro bono would say yes that's part of our resume that's part of what we're
asked at the end of each year did you write any edited book chapters
says Piper job to do that to write stuff yes
American tradition and Steve restoring science
accountability the group requesting Catherine años emails
is the american tradition Institute
argument behind a cloud movement that didn't stand scrutiny
generally here's their chief lawyer Chris Horner who wrote the request
we must take Chris home owner would not speak with frontline on camera
but ATI told us they were just looking for insights into how scientists made
their deliberations
Texas A&M scientist Andrew Dessler is an expert on how clouds relate to climate
change
he became a target of the American tradition Institute after one quote in a
front-page New York Times article
Deshler received a legal request for emails the next morning
but I actually had the first quote in the story
and I'm within hours on that story coming out
university received a formal request for my email
the goal of this was to try to find something the emails
that would be used to embarrass climate science
they were destroying the dice is completely random they had no reason to
think
that there was anything improper but they're hoping to hit the jackpot
like they did with Climategate as we began our reporting
ATI request emails climate scientists might have sent to frontline
its you know I don't let that stop me
I fully expect that after this
program airs on get another for a request for all of my emails with you
I am in you know at SOB's deal with that
II as a climate scientist I think a lot about the future it goes with the job
and i wanna make sure that in 50 years or 100 years for two hundred years
nobody can ever say we didn't warn them
this summer at the washington DC defending the Dream summit for the group
Americans for Prosperity
they have their own warning to where the leftist agenda that they believe
underlies the climate change movement
reducing emissions is cover for reducing freedom they say
and they have the means to carry their free market message anywhere in the US
thus our sixth annual the thing the American Dream summit we launch season
that followed 2007 it's a great way to bring activist to get around the country
a cab on the organization
and also it's good to have a bunch of free-market conservatives in DC occasion
as well
how does free-market conservatism relate to climate change and the
scientific argument over doesn't to the scientific side are you very much so
relates to the policies that the left pushes in the name of global warming
never once in a while will make a statement about the science
but that's the tiny percentage of what we do and how we spend our money
you win the policy you wanna science I think so
I do duck this is a community of skeptics
at the AAFP rally I ran into my ring the bell for supportive attendee
and a speaker why are you here
well these are the grass roots that you know support our site
this is essentially a more organized for a $50 for
parade with a better-funded
it said we've made great headway what it means for candidates in the Republican
side is if you buy into green energy or Qi play
footsie on this issue you do so at your political para you do
absolutely and that's a big change is important
again I remember for fiber even three years ago John a lot republicans they
would they would play games at this
that's okay Walcott I think I did green energy agenda
but I won't go all the way and support cap-and-trade they did they try to walk
down the middle
and that's wrong I'll I think it's philosophically inconsistent
but it's also politically disadvantageous and we've worked hard to
make that so by the way
God
more help health call
correct for one thing we've changed with a FB
as we now have only two and we can do calls and emails and letters in rallies
events
and pressure I i think thats quite a big difference with house I didn't have that
five or six years ago on this issue we do now
I do think it's a new day for that reason the
the this new day has dramatically transform the way lawmakers approach
global warming on capitol hill
suddenly the news was who wasn't talking about
fred Upton who is chairman
the House Energy and Commerce Committee he's charged with
writing regulations that would control climate change emissions
and when I asked him this question do you think climate change is causing the
car to become warmer and he smiled
nice guys I'm sorry I'm I'm just not going to answer that me turned around
and went on to the house for
where I can as a reporter I'm not allowed to go coral Davenport reports on
energy and environmental issues for the national journal
for him to say I don't talk about this it is that like the
chairman of the Armed Services Committee saying I don't talk about the pentagon
Lee
yes but I should say and thats that does seem to be a change
and chairman upton's views before he took on this leadership
a fred Upton was you know has long been a moderate who's worked on this issue's
whose reach across the aisle in the city on these issues
before he became chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee on his
website
an he had a phrase that climate change is a problem that was deleted
after he became chairmen at the house energy committee so we're definitely
seeing a shift honest
chairman up 10% decline frontline's request for an interview
but the congressman wasn't the only one not talking
in 2011 the National Journal tried to Paul
all GOP lawmakers on Climate Change I came up with the idea to
ask every Republican member of congress
three simple questions about climate change they're very simple
and they're basically you know do you think that climate change is causing
there are three come warmer
straightforward how much if any of that do you think is
attributable to human activity and what's the appropriate government
response
and normally lawmakers love to answer questions they love to opine
this was amazing members of congress
did not want answer the question day
in some cases they just said straight-up
I'm not going to answer that in some cases what was really amazing is the
literally
ran into an elevator in l.a you know in an elevator close my apt
with their majority in the House GOP lawmakers took steps to keep the issue
from coming up at all
including dissolving the official House Committee on global warming
why'd you reach out only two Republicans it's rare to find a democrat who'll
outright flatly question or deny any
the basic scientific reasons a climate change
this new political environment has been an opportunity for lawmakers like
Republican James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin
to claim they are the new mainstream view on global warming
do you believe global warming is caused by the activity of human beings
partially but not completely percentage
can't predict that 30 percent fifty percent well I know it's not zero and I
know it's not a hundred
I can't tell you what number it is in between if
ninety-seven percent of scientists say it is mostly or
significantly caused by human activity what he say that
up beer entitled to their opinion
but they're going to him to sleep ever be settled scientifically if
ninety-seven percent consensus doesn't sell it for you
well i you know I think that if
it's up to the scientists and their supporters to convince the public that
this is the right thing to do
am the supporters of that side of the argument in the congress
have been huge flop
I visited one of the key democrats on this issue Massachusetts Senator John
Kerry what happened to all the momentum before years ago
well american politics is being as a
completely defined by huge sums of money we had
really a very broad coalition to people who believe that we ought to move
forward and do something but
as the campaign to fear built up people began to retreat
they spent huge sums of money
in a campaign have major disinformation that had an impact
had a profound impact and it has now made many people in public life very gun
shy
because they're afraid of having those amounts of money spent against them
this is what they fear what happened in 2010 2:06 term South Carolina
congressman bob inglis
Republican who once thought he was a safe income
is solidly red state you know pretty conservative fellow I
93 American Conservative Union rating Hunter said christian coalition honey
percent national right to life
a with the NRA 0 with the ADA Americans for Democratic Action
liberal group and 23 by some mistake with the AFL CIO
a demand a recount I wanted a zero but English does accept the scientific
consensus on global warming
and favors legislation to curb the effects of co2 in the atmosphere
he faced a tea party rebellion in his primary
had a big-tent gathering
in Spartanburg County but two republicans and any the Great Big Ten
comes a question
to me yes are no do you believe
inhuman causation on Climate Change
I had a bad habit if pension question so I said
yes boo hiss comes a craft
as it passes out funny said Ted um
and so I mean they're yet couple hundred three people there
I mean it was intense he was pounded in commercials and on talk radio
it became a of repeated
theme on talk radio and that is a major source of information
course for Republican primary voters of
they were hearing angus is left
the reservation he's over there somewhere with al gore
so how's things around here his slow food
how the countries whale from
when you get to financial collapse killing
that's what made it possible for some well spent money
tupelo doubt into the science pic is
you know to bankers failed us ships
the federal government's failing this ad spending too much money and the
scientist who are funded by the federal government they're probably in it too
and besides their godless liberals English was defeated
Bob Inglis was defeated in a republican primary
79 to 21 percent now how many times has an incumbent who isn't in prison
we're facing a prison sentence lost his own primary by 79 to 21 percent
this was overwhelming but what's happened be as a the smile on your face
suggests
manly 11 of course we 11
were on the record the and their grandchildren and great-grandchildren
I can read this climate hearing in the lame-duck Congress was English his last
your child is sick 98 doctors
say treating this way to
say no this others the way to go I'll go with the two
you taking a big risk those kids
thank you mister it was a very key factor in 10 to 15
congressional districts in the 2010 election
were strong supporters of climate change legislation
ended up being defeated and there's nothing like a loss in an election
to promote fear in the survivors
and that's exactly what happened in the United States Congress
be on Washington in wave after wave the skeptic tactic to fighting scientific
warnings with doubt
and delay was finding success
Tennessee passed a law allowing the views of climate change skeptics to be
taught
in schools a virginia state legislator cut the words
sea level rise from an official request to study coastal communities
calling it a left-wing term go away with almost every storm
majors here in North Carolina a warning from scientists on sea level rise would
cause politicians
to try and legislate climate change out of existence
yes both they're here to try to protect these houses
here in 2010 19 scientists on a state commission warned of a possible sea
level rise by the end of the century
to get an idea have yeah the nature these doom geologist Stanley Riggs was
one of the scientists
we were asked to do is to develop
what what is the history have sea level rise and work in North Carolina expect
are 25 years from now fifty years now hundred years from now
the report said to expect a 39-inch ocean rocks and estimate in the middle
range consistent with other predictions for the region
39 inch perfect comes to pass here everything we'd see
this town will be under water the Commission's warning was seen as a
threat by a coastal economic development group
NC 20 right now now you add a flood from a
storm hurricane whatever sometime soon as the group's chairman
they had a draft policy which mandated that everything be
designed and constructed to a $39 and sea level rise
people that recommended we plan immediately for 39 inches did not
understand
economic consequences Thomson is a skeptic himself
and fears scientists in their warnings more than he fears any climate change
you know I don't believe we're gonna have a sea level rise they were close to
them I think they're
credible scientists out there they're saying it's beginning to decelerate
nothing
year NC twenties website contains a familiar archive skeptic information
there's the Oregon petition and a host of sources for people looking to doubt
the scientific consensus
people like north carolina state representative bill Cooke
who do you rely of I rely on
whatever size makes good sense
if you want to go on a show with your so that this here
this year's wanna sources yes this is a book by
fred singer and then st. Avery right
I'll and what what about this book really
was meaningful to you well it's very
fax you it it tells almost studies and gives you a complete bibliography on
who did what kinda study and where was done
and when that was done and how it was done this book
may better sense to me than what I've seen from other sources
co2 is a of
gas is used by all these beautiful trees
dress good thing it's a good thing
cook cosponsored a bill to compel North Carolina to disregard scientific
warnings about climate change
it was written by state senator David rouser well you know I don't necessarily
listen any one person
and i cant me know take off a whole list of scientists that are
true sea level rise and a whole is a scientist that are
I'm just come in at it from its common sense standpoint
other things men warm and cool and since day one
and I E you know the effect
own sea level change what do we know about it
the bill would limit authorities to considering historical data in their sea
level projections
the future could only be based on the past the problem is
I mean North Carolina beachfront said very close to sea level
very close and you're vulnerable because all
hurricane affects there's a storm surges
I and your phone because I've high tides those
our vulnerabilities don't go away leave because you just legislate them away
when the bill hit the beaches of North Carolina
it had become so controversial that the provision disregarding global warming
was dropped but the science was put on hold for four years
there would have to be a new coastline study
and skeptic views would need to be considered there when
where we won this one is yeah is over and we're gonna be
involved I hope the conservative scientist commandery do this
definitely one-sided
stay p
I along
news
if we to change was what they're saying is that we have to include all the
naysayers and
and all the our people say climate changes
happening at sea level is rising so it's gotta be
which makes it look like you're just one opinion yeah
which means you lost well for the moment
there's the tester right there
at Ocean will dictate what happens the oceans gonna win
but for now
back at the Heartland conference in Chicago they feel they're winning
their campaign of alternative scientific studies opinion pieces books in
advertising
charts and presentations has been building for years
it's been money well spent in the early days much of it came from fossil fuel
interests
Heartland presenter willie soon as received money from Exxon Mobil
warming human-caused Chris Warner was formerly a registered lobbyist
oil gas and chemical company since climatologist pat michaels at the cato
institute has estimated forty percent of his funding is come from fossil fuel
interests
polity exxon at one time was when a park lands most generous donors
there were a lot of corporations including oil companies that objected to
the chiro accords in 1997 but most have them lobbied
against the treaty on economic unfairness grounds
but exxon did something that I i think was fairly radical which was that they'd
chose to go after the science lives and as for carbon dioxide
it isn't smog or smoke it's what we breathe out
and plants breathin borrowing tactics used on behalf of the tobacco industry
advocacy groups were enlisted to confuse the issue
what our lives shut down new federal regulations
I they call it pollution we call it life
a lot of these groups were run by economists litigators lawyers and public
policy specialist people who specialized in getting a message out
this group may not have been scientists but they were really good at this or
think
well some of them actually came out of campaigning on behalf of the tobacco
industry
the explicit goal that was written down as part of this campaign
was let's create doubt create a sense of a balanced debate
and make sure that these lines of skepticism in the sand
become routinely apart a public discussion about climate science and in
fact they succeeded at that
exxon's millions for skeptics group made a public
target which would eventually be a problem for a publicly traded company
when did this become a PR problem on some level
for exxon well environmental groups
science scientists I and later members of congress
became aware love this campaigning because it was right out in the open
ap Exxon Mobil shareholder meetings summer these activists and thus under
started turning up
to protest Exxon Mobil's funding have such groups
in 2006 new leadership in Exxon Mobil
decided to reassess this fight the science strategy
see they reviewed some of these free market group that they had been funding
and they cut funding to the most radical
among them especially the smaller certain purpose built group that we're
just concentrating on attacking climate science
economy all these further exxon stopped funding this heartland conference and
its sponsors five years ago
but that didn't stop the broader mission defending the free market
we close the deficit and ultimately pay off day
if dealing with global warming did not involve intervention in the economy
with Heartland Institute be involvement that's a that's a theoretical question
we believe in limited government and free markets we believe in identifying
and implementing
sound science free-market solutions to societal problems
and that message is generated solid financial support for activist groups
like
Americans for Prosperity we have over eighty thousand activists and donors
across the country find a happy some big donors chirpy bet we're glad to have
they done is absolutely
exxon I wish we had more corporate support a tooth
they don't and they want to give Dave P very often I think frankly that were too
out there on the free market for a Koch brothers David Koch's the chairman of
our ERP foundation we're glad to have the support
we don't disclose a level above contributions but we're very proud to
have their support Americans for Prosperity
were blessed with just such a leader in our chairman David Cook
with money from their oil and gas holdings David Koch and his brother
Charles along with other powerful family foundations
have quietly become the venture capitalists have this free market
ideology America DRI
a free enterprise capitalism
is alive and well the major funders are the climate counter movement or
ideologically driven foundations they're very much concerned about
conservative values and worldviews
sociologist in Stanford fellow Robert Brule is studying the funding patterns
have these groups
in fact he's noticed a new benefactor an entity called
donors trust whose donors trust donors trust i think is a C
for c3 that's given to us absolutely
we discovered that nearly half of Americans for Prosperity support comes
from donors trust
and do you know who's behind it
I think the board is publicly list I'm pretty sure
their directors are listed but the donors Oct
from this office on an unassuming Street in Alexandria Virginia
according to public records donors trust has become the number one supporter of
the group that lead this movement
we don't know a lot about donors trust it is
a black box with a few little clues coming out here and there but no
real image before we're
donors trust supports limited government and free enterprise
with the promise of anonymity their website says
for donors who wish to safeguard their charitable intent
so you see the shift from attributable
funding to anonymous fund which insulates the giver from
any kind of political fallout from there giving
said people were organizing around 0 evil Exxon Mobil
oh he will Koch brothers now it's
donors trust donors capital
who are they they get money they give it out
and that quiet money buys a platform for people
like Christopher Monckton scientists
throughout pushing this cat have political
agenda to Marxist agenda
course they wouldn't call themselves and they call themselves environment
green is the new thread if you
I'm its all love the conspiratorial language
and arguable claims by the skeptics the idea of doing something about climate
change
has gotten lost young my
blackness is not just economic issue or
an environmental concern this is a national security crisis
the national call to action from just four years ago
has vanished global warming demand are her chin
attention I think the the risks of climate change a real
and that you're seeing climate change I think human activity is contributing to
it we don't always see eye to eye
to renew no well we do agree
our country must take action to address climate change why would you ever do a
commercial
with Nancy Pelosi I was really stupid do you believe global warming man-made
global warming is real
as I believe we don't know we don't know
what's causing climate change there is no such thing
as global warming the sciences is not settled on this
even for President Obama action on climate change has been only a passing
reference
close election campaign thanks
that issue is not good for them right now he noticed
present doesn't talk much about him but notice I mean I'm not notice that we
think you'll get
I think it says a lot about the effort and I think it says a lot about
Americans making a decision
it's really interesting because we don't hear
Barack Obama talking much about it Anna we don't hear Mitt Romney talking much
about it
you what you're wrong
what if anybody is wrong in this debate what if you're wrong
then all have to say I'm sorry and
I I wish we could speed up our efforts to
reverse the policies that we have supported your it Ceri
apologies are not inaction has consequences
high temperature records broken by the Honduran there is now no concerted
national response to climate change
wildfire season tens delay the scientific community says
is with the planet simply can't afford find a change is coming
means drought means fire it means suffering
there around the entire climate is changing defecting our energy
our water our agriculture in our house drought has forced to drink from its
last preserves
the amount of sea ice on the Arctic Ocean 2012 was a record lows
almost Speedway all have to start getting used to this kind of thing
money the problem with climate change is that I think too many americans it has
seemed
like a threat not to living generations but to future generations
and with that uncertainty and with the economic climate that we are an
americans have been unwilling to impose a tax on themselves in order to protect
generations yet unborn it may be that
over the next 10 to 15 years Americans will reconsider
the ideas that were propounded by these campaigners
that there's a lot I doubt about follow the tenets of the science
and follow a different kind of intuition which is that this is here
with the snow
in
frontline continues on mine with a multimedia time-line
tracks the change in public opinion about climate change
the vid versus Goliath sore from those behind the campaign to change the
scientific and political consensus
I think that's made a big difference examine the media as well by the way
not a hybrid and follow from mine on Facebook and Twitter
or share your thoughts at PBS .org slash front line
for more on this and other frontline programs
visit our website at PBS top slash problem
frontline's climate have doubt is available on DVD
to water missus schott PS donahue called
one 800 play PBS
frontline is also available for download on iTunes
this
trusted in-depth independent
PBS