Glenn Beck: Climate Confusion


Climate Confusion

BY ROY SPENCER

STAHL:  There's still a lot of skepticism about whether global warming is manmade.

GORE:  I don't think there's a lot.

STAHL:  Well, there's pretty impressive people like the vice president who said we don't know what causes it.

GORE:  You're talking about Dick Cheney.

STAHL:  Yeah, and others who say we don't know what causes it and why spend all this money until we really, really know.

GORE:  I think that those people are in such a tiny, tiny minority now with their point of view, they are almost like the ones who still believe that the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona and those who believe the Earth is flat.  That demeans them a little bit but it's not that far off.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

GLENN:  Just a little bit.  Roy Spencer, former senior scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.  Welcome to the program, Roy.

SPENCER:  Hey, Glenn, thanks for having me.

GLENN:  As a guy who worked for NASA, won NASA's medal for scientific achievement, did we land on the moon?

SPENCER:  Well, when I left NASA six years ago, that was part of an oath I took.  So I'm really not allowed to talk about that.

SPENCER:  You would have to kill me if you told me the truth.  Well, I just want to make sure that you know as somebody who, you know, won awards for NASA and worked for NASA that the Earth is round and we did land on the moon.

SPENCER:  Well, what's funny is that Al Gore's urban legend about global warming has now extended to history because it turns out that that's a historic urban legend that mankind used to think the Earth was flat.  It turns out there really isn't any historical evidence for that.

GLENN:  It's -- you know, we just posted an article at CNN.com about big oil and Al Gore and his lies, et cetera, et cetera, and he says that we're talking about 6% of Americans that don't believe in the moon landing but only 21% believe that greenhouse gases are the biggest factor causing global warming.  That's from the New York Times.  Only 21% say this problem is caused by man, yet he makes it sound like, oh, well, that's just, there's nobody.  I mean, you've got to be crazy to not believe that man is responsible for this and yada, yada, yada.  What would you say the split is among scientists?

SPENCER:  Well, the vast majority of scientists, it's not all of them agree that we've warmed.  The big question as you are alluding to is whether -- you know, to what extent is the warming manmade versus natural and what most people don't realize is that there has never been a single scientific study published which has ruled out natural variability for our current warmth.  So I would say, you know, probably over 50% of the scientists think it's mostly manmade but that's a statement of space.  You know, this whole idea of consensus, that's a political term.  And the more we learn about climate variability now, the more I think we're realizing that the climate system isn't really that sensitive to manmade greenhouse gases which would mean that most of the warming we've seen is natural.

GLENN:  I saw you at this conference in New York and we've talked here recently at this conference on skeptics and the problem with it was is you got up to give the speech and I think what you said was really, really important but I don't know what the hell you're even talking about.  You know, you guys are coming in with real science and you were talking about the satellite data and now we have actual data to replace the made-up variables that Al Gore and the global warming people have just said, well, maybe because we don't know, we can't measure this, maybe this number is actually this.  And when you look at -- you know, when you look at the formula to make these computer models, now we actually have data.  And when you plug it in, it changes everything entirely.  Did I get it kind of right on what you were talking about?

SPENCER:  Well, yeah, kind of.  You know, obviously models, computer models are only going to put out what you program into them.  You know, they're very dependent on what you put into them.

GLENN:  Garbage in, garbage out.

SPENCER:  Right.  And what they put into them is the way they think the climate system operates.  And believe it or not, one of the major things we're learning right now is it looks like a lot of these climate scientists, the ones that are running these models, might have confused cause and effect in the climate system when they look at the climate system.  Because we watch -- we look at natural variability, you know, El Nino, La Nina, we try to figure out what's causing what.  Well, it turns out that if you mix up cause and effect, it will always look like the climate system is very sensitive to things like adding CO2.

GLENN:  And how do the new satellites, the new NASA satellite information get -- improve this?

SPENCER:  Oh, the new NASA satellites are really great.  We've got all kinds of new instruments up there now mainly on the NASA aqua and terra satellites and these are giving us all kinds of measurements related to, you know, clouds, types of clouds, temperatures, sea surface temperatures, winds, how much infrared radiation the Earth is giving off.

GLENN:  Roy, how does the average person know what to look for?  For instance, I read a story today that the Earth hasn't warmed in the last ten years, there has been no more global climate change and then they say --

SPENCER:  Well, that's one of those lies, damn lies and statistics things.  Yeah, it hasn't warmed since '98 but if you use '99 as a starting point it's warmed tremendously.  I think the most accurate thing to say statistically is it basically hasn't warmed or cooled in the last seven years.  It's been pretty flat.  And the longer we go without warming resuming, the more it's going to have to warm to catch up to what, you know, the UN is predicting and Al Gore is predicting.

GLENN:  Well, but how do we -- I mean, in the article it said, "Well, wait a minute, that's -- you can't look at it short-term like that, you can't look at it seven years."  Well, what is long term?  When do we see it and say, okay, it's real?

SPENCER:  Pick a number.  There is no number.  The longer you look, you know, the more useful your estimates of long-term change are going to be.  That's one reason why I don't like to say that we're experiencing global warming because that makes it sound like we know what's going to happen in the future.  I only say we've experienced warming in the past, at least up until about seven or six years ago because we don't know what's going to happen in the future.  It could be global warming has stopped for all we know.

GLENN:  Let me -- may I play a piece of audio for you and get your reaction?  Go ahead and play.  This is Ted Turner this week.

TURNER:  Doing it will be catastrophic.  We'll have 8 degrees, we'll be 8 degrees hotter in ten -- not 10 but in 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow.  Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals.  Civilization will have broken down.  What the few people are left will be living in a failed state like Somalia or Sudan and living conditions will be intolerable.  The droughts will be so bad, there will be no more corn growing.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

GLENN:  I mean, you are the former senior scientist for NASA on climate studies.  Alarmist?

SPENCER:  Yeah, Mr. Turner is one of our leading global warming experts.  He probably --

GLENN:  I didn't know that.

SPENCER:  I see the forecast has now, you know, gone up to 8 to 10 degrees in only 30 years.  So that's -- man, that's really --

GLENN:  Well, 30 to 40.

SPENCER:  Yeah, 30 to 40 years.  Notice, but also later in the interview he pointed out that it's been a long time since he said something stupid.  So it could be that that's relevant.

GLENN:  Any science, any science that says anything like what he just predicted?

SPENCER:  No, not that I know of.

GLENN:  Yeah, okay.  All right.  I want to -- can you hold for just a second?  Because in your book you talk about some of the dumbest solutions that scientists have and I want to get into that here in just a second.  Climate Confusion.

Glenn created "The Senate Fails to Condemn INFANTICIDE" in response to the Senate not passing Nebraska Senator Ben Sasses' bill banning infanticide early this year. In an effort to help support pro-life charities, Glenn first posted this for sale on eBay before being banned multiple times before we finally had enough and put it up for sale on bidpal.net.

At the time of this post, the bid was up to $4,700 — but we can do better than that. Please help us raise money for a good cause, you don't even have to display it anywhere in your home, you can just keep it in storage or something! If you want this priceless piece created by one of the most influential people in the world of art, place your bids here.

Can you remember the economic crisis of 2008 and how you felt when the news broke that Lehman Brothers had collapsed? I have found an economic threat that everyone needs to be aware of, so you can prepare yourself in case we see another 2008 type collapse. I am going to present the evidence to you and I urge you to verify everything and to form your own opinion.

What is that threat?

It is a bank called Deutsche Bank. They are by far the most dominant bank in Germany which is the world's fourth-largest economy. In 2018 they had €2.08 Trillion worth of assets and the second-placed bank (DZ Bank) had €506 Billion worth of assets. To show you how dominant this bank is, they have more assets than the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th sized banks combined.
When we review a business there are three key parts to analysis:

  • Market sentiment
  • Business numbers
  • Technical Analysis

Market Sentiment

Deutsche Bank has a long history of potential scandals including going all the way back to World War 2 and dealing in Nazi gold. Below are five recent stories which have increased the negative sentiment around Deutsche Bank.

  1. In 2007, they purchased a portfolio of loans worth $7.8 billion and purchased insurance from Warren Buffets Company. It was discovered they did not set aside enough capital to cover any potential losses. Over the course of the ten years, they lost $1.6 billion, and when they sold the loan they did not update their financial statements to include the big loss
  2. The Panama Papers are an ongoing investigation looking for many things including offshore tax havens. These investigations have resulted in several heads of state resigning including in Iceland and Pakistan. Last November, 170 police raided 6 different offices in Frankfurt looking for evidence of money laundering.
  3. Estonia is a small country in Eastern Europe. It has a population of 1.3 million people and a GDP of €26 billion. In January, it was discovered Deutsche Bank got involved with a Danish bank called Danke Bank and processed over $230 billion worth of cross country payments (including from Soviet Russia) through one bank in Estonia.
  4. There have been rumors of issues with Deutsche for a while now and one of the solutions put forth was a merger with a bank called CommerzBank. The leaders of both companies met and they even got support from politicians. In April, news broke that the merger talks had failed because over worries the risks and costs would be too great.
  5. Last week in France, Investment banking boss Garth Ritchie and others were arrested in France over illicit tax transactions.

Business Numbers

Deutsche Bank is already struggling as they are losing staff, losing market share, and bonuses are expected to be down at least 10% and further rounds of cost-cutting to come. Now imagine the impact if business costs start going up.

The banking industry works in a very simple way. They raise funds through large bonds at low-interest rates and then sell those funds to business and individuals thru products like loans and credit cards at a higher interest rate which results in a potential profit.

Earlier this year, Deutsche Bank tried raising money through several bonds. They paid 180bp (basis points) on a two-year bond and 230bp on a seven-year bond. Let me put this in context for you. There is a small bank in Spain called Caixabank which paid 225bp on a five-year bond and one of the larger banks in Spain, BBVA paid 130bp on a five-year bond.

  • How and why is a small bank in Spain getting a better deal on bonds than a huge bank in Germany?
  • Why is a large bank in Spain getting a bond 100bp cheaper than a German bank?
  • What does the market know that we do not?

Stock Price

Deutsche is also missing revenue projections which further hurt the business ability to survive and prosper. As you can imagine all of this news has a deep and lasting impact on its stock price which is in deep trouble. Before I share the stock price, I need to put this into the context of the market and the industry compared to the big economic crash of 2008. Below you will see a chart of some banking stocks from around the world with their peak price prior to the 2008 crash, the low of the 2008 recession and the price today:

As you can see from the above chart the banks in America have recovered from the 2008 recession by anywhere up 375% and JP Morgan has not only recovered its price in full but is constantly setting new high's. Ireland went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the EU/IMF following the 2008 crash and even our national bank has more than doubled its price since 2008. The worst performing bank I could find was Societe Generale which has issues but is still hovering around its 2008 low price levels.

Now let's put that into the context of Deutsche Bank. Not only has the stock not rebounded but it is over 65% below its 2008 low at $6.75.

Technical Analysis

When you are dealing with the stock market, you also have people who study pricing through technical analysis. Experts look at things like FIB sequences, trend lines, and support levels. Support levels are a key metric for a stock failing because are looking to find where it will find support and potentially bounce higher.

We are very close to a key support level ($6.40) and if the price goes below this level, there is no saying exactly how low the price could go. At least one company expects Deutsche to fall below this support level, as several weeks ago UBS downgraded the stock to a sell order. This news was compounded last Friday when rating agency Fitch, downgraded their credit rating to BBB or two levels above JUNK status.

Other Information

I know you are likely reading this and thinking "this bank must have smart people in charge and surely they have a plan, right?" I am sure there is a plan and while they have kept their cards close to their chest, they have spoken in the past about the areas they foresee having growth for the company – they include business in Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Egypt. Do they strike you as countries which are stable and will offer steady and reliable growth? Do you have to think really hard to imagine how this could go potentially very wrong?

Questions

I believe there is at least a solid case Deutsche is in a LOT of trouble. So what are possible scenarios for the future? I will lay out the key questions below but I must stress that it's impossible to say for sure what exactly will happen. One of the key numbers to remember here is they have roughly €50 billion worth of derivatives.

  • How likely is it that the bank can turn things around and survive?
  • How likely is it the bank continues to run into trouble, its stock price fails and eventually fails?
  • If you think it is likely it will fail, the question becomes what will the fallout be? Who will be affected?
  • Will they be bailed out?
  • If so, by whom? The German government, ECB, IMF, the Federal Reserve?
  • What will the German government think? Some members recently spoke out saying they would block public money for the proposed merger? Will they block funds if it failed?
  • Will other banks be exposed and affected? Will they have to take losses?
  • Will those losses be spread around or will one or more bank be mainly affect?
  • Will this affect the sentiment of the banking sector and cause a panic?
  • If there are issues and it starts affecting the stock prices, what will be the impact on other industries?

Last Question

The last question revolves solely around the banks and the regulators? How secure are the other banks? We all hear about how banks are now put through "stress tests" but how much trust do you put in those results? How much trust do you have in the regulators?

I know this may make me sound like a conspiracy theorist to some but it's an honest question. The Fed is on public record saying they want to keep this economy strong as long as possible. If a bank did not perform strongly in a stress test or even barely failed one, do you think they would report it?

Can you imagine the pressure that body would come under to stay silent? Can you imagine the rhetoric they would face with questions like, "Are you really going to fail one bank? Do you know how many people will lose their jobs if you do that?" Am I saying this is happening? No, but can you really rule it out 100% as a possibility?

I urge you to ponder on these questions, do your own research and find YOUR answers.

Update: The most freaquently asked question I have received from this column / show is how much time do we have to prepare. This is an impossible question to answer, as it could fail tomorrow, next week or might be next year. However I want to provide you a potential date for your diary – July 24th. That is when Deutsche will release their next earnings report and if it comes in below expectations, it could cause a further drop in price casting more doubt over the future viability of the bank.

Please support Jonathon's weekly podcast which is exclusive to the Blaze Media and available for FREE. He offers a unique perspective by promoting America's Founding Principles and brings every issue back to a set of core principles which are always based around the laws of nature. You can find links to his show by clicking here or by searching for Freedoms Disciple on your favorite audio platform.

Survey: Where do you stand on these conspiracy theories?

Thought Catalog / Unsplash

Have you seen this survey on the most-believed conspiracy theories in America?

It's no surprise the survey has been getting so much attention. The results are actually a pretty disturbing.

Infographic: Belief in Conspiracy Theories in the United States | Statista

I decided to put together a quick survey of my own, with slightly different wording.

Up-vote the ones you agree with and down-vote the ones you disagree with.

I believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK alone. However, I would not be surprised to find out the government sealed evidence that others were involved.

If by "deep state" you mean long-time Washington power brokers who are used to calling the shots and now feel threatened by Donald Trump not listening to their advice or council — yes, I do believe that many people like that are working against him and his administration.

Whether alien bodies are in Area 51 or not, I do believe the government knows more about UFOs than they have told us.

I do not believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11, but as we know, NSA advisor Sandy Berger was caught destroying documents from the national archives related to both Bush and Clinton. All U.S. administrations have been to close to the Saudis, and the Saudis were involved in 9/11 at some level.

I believe the climate is always changing — it's natural. I would be willing to accept that man MAY play a role in this. But I do not believe in the solutions currently being discussed, nor do I believe the intention of most political activists are pure.

Any talk of the Illuminati provides the true dangers to man's freedom — like very powerful NGOS and men like George Soros — a perfect cover.

The U.S. government has done some horrible experiments on people and land — I also suspect they will do more things in the future. But I do not believe in the systematic spraying of chemicals using chemtrails.

The moon landing was real, but I see a time coming when people will not be able to trust their eyes due to deep fakes.

What do you think?

Let me know in the comments section below.