John Holdren

" All right."

" Hot summer night indeed hey listen it's beautiful summer morning here. And I guess on -- it's horrible on AMC TV WI IKO is John -- a professor at the Kennedy school of government. The department written planetary sciences and have a in the director of the Woods Hole research center of course my cohost in the Akio studio is. Todd Feinberg and the professor should know you know guests of -- it's foreign. Receive a gift certificate from Fleming's steakhouse. The state knows our Q what needs is on Stuart street the best steakhouse in the city and professor hold -- happening here. 100 wines by the glass fabulous seafood shrimp crab -- we'll disparate -- the whole deal probably increases. Global footprint that cabin footprint whatever who are these are green stakes -- that this is good stuff then this is good stuff and so welcome back John -- thank you for hanging on. Let me here yes sir Todd -- got a question for you before we go to the callers about. That's tied at the cape wind that he wanted to work further explore."

" Florida I notice on your -- that your that Teresa and John Heinz professor of environmental policy and I was wondering if how they did. That the politics of of Teresa Heinz and John Kerry might have influenced your activities and whether your involved in the writing of their book at all."

" Number one when people endowed chairs at our effort to people would doubt it shares don't have any influence over who gets waited in the chair. And they don't have any influence over what the person peaches writes -- says. I happened to and friends with racial lines for many years and friends with her prone areas a couple. Since that time they got married. I did -- look over the climate chapter in the book and make some suggestions. Which they. I didn't actually write in yet."

" It's all of the area and I am curious about a well all I want to cape wind each India that was. You know senate Kennedy's oppose Senator Kerry I think has been a little bit more neutral on and I think to raise scientists so."

" And one of the suspicions about the whole global warming movement is that there's this flow of money that a cruise -- people who are doing research that supports the movement and that it's tougher to survive as a scientist or if you're on the other side."

" I actually think that's -- Reppas solely. Proposition number one because again. The amounts of money behind the contrary view have been far larger than -- some money behind the view. That that global climate change is real you really have to imagine to think this is a -- of the people that bought off. That the leadership at every national academy of sciences in the world as some in our offices would be a very strange things and national academies. Are basically. Bodies that consist of the most distinguished scientists and their respective countries in the offered by -- when requested that their governments on. Non partisan basis the idea that every academy of sciences in the world. Could've been bought off."

" And and a tank he had no I think you're pretty proud are you make a great point the nets made very nicely I think in the -- I would just it's -- clarify I don't think people think that that there's a buying off going -- I think what it it's more tipping point. That there's a lot of money influencing things ago on a certain direction when you're doing research the perception is that you need research dollars and those dollars come from people of certain belief systems. And that that the flow of money from one direction or another mighty influence. Things over tipping point towards one side or the other."

" Actually -- mention that most of the budget that would over search center which tried direct. Comes from the National Science Foundation from NASA from the national oceanographic and atmospheric administration. The flow of money to this center did not diminished from those agencies during the Bush Administration. You know these are bodies it's fun science and on propaganda."

" Appreciate the the inside in the clarification professor John Holden is our guest here -- right to the calls let's go to ray in Wakefield pay ray you are next on -- for a AM 680 WRKO."

" Speaker morning -- you proposals and yeah it's not Feinberg. Didn't I think the problem with. With the environment is when it becomes politicized. You know let's err on the side of caution. I don't believe in I think as a nation where we're probably more reactionary and pro active. We react to things -- up Croats that we don't get ahead of the curve we get behind the curve. I think that there may -- a degree of truth to this. -- see I'm -- I'm -- Republican. And I don't necessarily believe in. The -- and Al Gore takes. But nevertheless. I think that for our own safety for a children's future. We have to think about it may be some validity to this we need to see the numbers we need to see what's going on. We need to judge. Said you know fossil fuel through let -- let's face it -- mean if anybody's ever written behind a bus you know what the -- coming out of it. Being you can you can just tell just by the fact that you know be you'll look at this -- like Beijing. In hope that this I mean."

" So ray let me interrupt the hurricane for a minute when you say err on the side of caution you sound very very much like John McCain who seems to have as the professors pointed out. Body into the notion. And then sometimes one pushed on it says look. Even if I'm wrong. We should be going about this for Iraq children's -- for the sake of the planet in for the technologies which will emerge when we becomes curious as a nation."

" Then it becomes a question of degree and to what degree is it worth buying into and to what degree is that pull us away from other priorities like getting -- foreign oil which to me is urgent it's a national security requirement I want us focus on the most urgent thing. And I'm concerned at the level of excitement that the media marketplace has in the general political marketplace has over global warming and -- I -- are."

" Creates excitement that scientists like professor -- bring that to me is the most common they need to be held in check by political -- well -- they can be held in check sometimes out officially so and although let's toss it to the professional period professor for his reaction to the re Todd and Tom dialog via."

" Well for first of all I would say that. Politicizing environments in the end is necessary if you need policy. That is politicizing it not necessarily a bad word if you need the government to take action either ordered a level playing field. Work to create incentives for people respond. To environmental challenges it -- start out being in the balance -- of producers and consumers. And you need politics in need policy and that's and that's what were getting. Getting. Among other things these two presidential candidates in the assessment that this is probably needed VO. It isn't an either or problem. In terms of are we going to reduce dependence on foreign oil are we would rest and we need to do both of those things. Our dependence on oil as a whole in fact is dangerous not just our dependence on foreign oil. Because when the price of oil on the world market goes up the economy has to pay the extra cost on every girl we use. -- matters who gets money. But in fact oil dependence to the extent that we have expanded -- dangerous thing in itself we gotta get off. Many of the approaches to addressing the oil problem also -- climate problem increased efficiency more efficient cars. -- both problems reduces. Dependence for -- and more efficient building Serbia after -- to -- people keep your house warm in the winter. Addresses both problems. There a lot of wind and so. We need to start in the off --"

" Let's get another call we can't jolly scholar from West -- jolly -- what professor John Holmgren from the wood told -- Good morning morning. --"

" I am I watch everything in recent months again about this issue. And it just seemed that. Certainly global warming is occurring and certainly it has been occurring and the US has been here I think what I've got out of it see. The orbit around Europe -- around the -- It's kind of a parabolic orbit. And when you have further away from the time we get the cold optimal Whitney -- to decide for those periods in decades we get these. The hot weather and analyze we all know knowing it was on there too. Two mile device so law and you know green land was I mean when the vikings and self. I had a hot time believing that we are impacting -- so much when the buffalo here. When those 2 o'clock Clorox the this country they had -- Freeport April -- over the past that was a traffic jam them and the the for the good of the --"

" While this dog does a lot of current science -- let me tell us that the the professor who who was actually studied this stuff professor. I'm sure you hear from consumers all the time citizens all the time saying hey what about green landed used to be green what about the ice age that have such a dominant effect on the terrain of New England."

" Starting the absolutely we've we've actually learned a lot. From the study of climate over geologic time that are telling it's important things about where we're heading now under human influences. By the middle of the century were now -- when he fifty. The best estimate if we stick with the businesses use will. Now. Is is that the world will be about. Three and a half degrees Fahrenheit. Warmer than it was in 1900 on the -- the last time the world was that war. 130000. Years ago. And that's that currency level was four to six meters higher. It is today at the end of the century -- now if we stick with the businesses you. The best estimate is will be. About 50% warmer still will be in the range of five degrees Fahrenheit warmer. Then we were in nineteen the last time in the world was that war. Which thirty million years ago when there were indeed crocodile swimming off of Greenland and palm trees and -- The question is whether we want to go rapidly -- by the -- noble and was twenty to thirty meters. I'm -- completely underwater Manhattan underwater London's under water. Singapore's water. Shanghai is under water. On -- water you really want to go there and you want to go to air. Relative."

" Rapid professor those a cataclysmic projections obviously and I had neither Todd -- we know that we don't have the credentials with which to dispute. Those assertions is a professor at MIT -- name escapes me he is quoted very very frequently in the in the newspapers however. Who says -- and I mean again very very similar -- credentials MIT scientists from like he says Jesus and a lot of Holcomb. And and -- kind of spells out why he thinks so when you are confronted with that. I don't want -- as a personal challenge but really it's a professional challenge another a fellow professional says -- this is all this is all who week what's your response to."

" My my my first response is that. Scientists -- diverse community like every other community professionals and there are always. Some skeptics on any given proposition in science. The MIT professor you mention is one of the very small minority of people with credentials and climate science disagree with the mainstream. And the extent that his disagreement has been trying to. A decade ago that individual would've said we don't really know that the climate is changing in the significant way and we don't know that humans are. Responsible it is. His position now is that we know it's changing in the significant way and we note humans are responsible for part of it. But he says he doesn't think it's going to amount to all that much. Over the course of the sentry work it again most of his colleagues -- is definitely -- department disagree with them most of this colleagues in the national academy of sciences disagree with them. -- here in the business of public policy. You probably ought to go with the odds go with the consensus have to ask yourself what is the probability. That the handful. Credentials skeptics are right and the the vast majority of scientists -- this -- raw file it's conceivable that the skeptics right. That are rarely turns out to be the case your in the policy business you -- with the odds."

" I put the odds let's take a call from Bob in Boston hey Bob you are next on -- forum AM 680 WRKO."

" that's a fastball right down the middle to the professor professor John Aldrin. Bob from Boston says luddites have stymied one among the more obvious solution to what should take on that."

" When have the first thing I would say is that the United States today it's 20% of its electricity from -- or nuclear reactors we get we generate more nuclear couple hours. In any country in the world including France. The world gets about. Six its electricity. From nuclear energy we could get more and it would help with the global warming question that the biggest thing -- slowed nuclear energy. Over the last twenty years has been economic. Nuclear energy turned out to be more expensive than most people anticipated. Natural gas turned out to be cheaper. For most of that period and so the electric power companies built mostly more gas fired power play that's changing. Natural gas is now much more expensive. It's also changing in the respect that. We now know the carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is a big problem and that adds to the incentive to build vote or nuclear plants and more. Renewable energy capacity more in morsel. And so he equated I think I think we're gonna do all of the about we're gonna have to solve some problems with nuclear energy we still haven't read is deciding what to do with the -- real thing. That is they soluble problem. We have to make sure that expanding nuclear energy around the world and spread of weapons capabilities. Figure out how to do that I think it can be done at the moment it. Got problems as well but again there's no free election there there's no. Silver bullet by itself is -- this."

" Problem. We'll try to get Leonid for the last call just before we go to the break and special thanks to professor -- last call -- and you got the final."

" It was the presence. At a -- and just show them and so this guy is killing me inside and defense Saints and they're not praise and they're not perfect. Let me put things it did everything these guys said we would be -- we don't have bird flu. The second thing is. But this -- one part of what this I think let's say that it's true there's global climate change is happening it's still hasn't been defined we'll put you said it was a bad call a global warming but he hasn't defined what it actually is. It's a huge a lot of accused by. And that we can do we can make the changes without affecting our lights go through increased. -- economy it's that are that are of technology. Since he's technology it's okay let's. Let's remember us. The 1950. 197970. Which generation had better technology which generation has more technology. But we make it better we're gonna have more than reality but he's describing what he believes. What I think is a lot of propaganda if you believe this. We're we're gonna have to live sort of in some sort of communal building or something we're gonna have to public transportation well got to be vegetarians is going to cost too much money to put going -- tell us. He's not the only people who do what he's saying he's not telling the truth technology will not fix the problem describe."

" While professing you get the final word though it's -- pretty bold statement of what the professor by the way but the go ahead professor of on the final --"

" You know what oil well let's start by saying I have defined what it is like -- global climate disruption in the global warming because it is the disruption not just the temperature but rainfall. All the -- the -- of wind storm tracks treatment. We are disrupting the ball well. And secondly it's not technology alone and it's not going to be Ausprey we have to change technology have to change policy we have a level playing field right now we're subsidizing well. Heavily. -- But the point is that not solve this problem are going to be much higher in the well I continually from may. By the number of people out there. Skeptical about this issue in contrast to the overwhelming. And I wonder they'd be skeptical. About brain answer to these people mentioned that they have to scientific understanding and -- its -- in. Different than. Net in the vast majority."

" It's it's what and it's really what major rob bid standouts. Really right from the anti -- the Boston Globe which is why we're -- posted on the website professor older want to make sure we are few special thanks for the extra time he gave us. Remind -- that will be sending -- a -- gift certificate from Fleming's steakhouse on Stuart street professor John Holden director of the woods -- research -- author of a great piece. On climate change in the skeptics who whom whom buyout and we'll be back Todd Feinberg and I will be back in a moment here on for parents for -- may have 680 WRKO."