วีดีโอ

Democracy never was a good idea, leaders need to be smart not popular.

I read many economics books, generally by Austrian and monetarist economists but also by Keynesians. I must say that Prof. Gillman's recent book that he talks about in this interview «The Spectre of Price Inflation» (2023) is far and away the best. His grasp of the historical roots of our present problems, the legal-legislative policy background, and especially his realistic, practical suggested policy solutions are terrific. This is an important book. If you are a student at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, sign up for his courses! Cheers from Canada.

The EV question is not as simple as you think. It requires a huge upgrade of infrastructure, huge increases in the volumes of mining for battery minerals. Saying we have to upgrade the electrical system anyway may or may not be true depending on how you get you want to get your electricity in the future. If we went with mostly nuclear as a low carbon electricity source, those plants would require a lot less transmission build out than renewables, eg because they could perhaps be built on existing power plant sites, and because they generate a steady amount of power. If you go with renewables, you need to massively overbuild the entire system to account for intermittency and you still need something to back them up for when they go virtually offline for days or weeks. That back up is gas, coal, hydrogen storage etc or a magical battery which has not been forthcoming at scale yet. I don't know which answer is best but I do know that variability in any process implies higher costs. The point is, it's all well and good talking about the efficiency of electric motors but when you start looking at the whole system cost all the way to the grid, mining etc., you'll realise it's much more complicated. And anything you need to mine, process and build will likely result in emissions. All this and more makes the question of how green electric cars are or aren't much more complicated.

Love Dr. Koonin!

You thinking you are able to “debunk” Koonin is seriously precious. Debunking… bahahahahahaha (deep breath)… bahahahahahahahahaha.

You can't find recorded data from 1000 & millions of years back & Niel is the only close thing to recorded data. Climate Change hoaxers take advantage of no recorded data of earths climate from 100s of millions of years during which the earth went through apocalyptic catastrophic climate events leading to many extinctions of various organisms without meaningful human interaction.

Koonin is not a Climate denier but instead a climate realist

I remember when son wanted to compete in high school on the cross country or nordic ski team. Since a female can go out for any male sport he assumed to could try out for the team. I tried to tell him the double standards that exist in this area. Since there is a law that any female can go out for any male sport and gender is not an issue. But when a male goes or ties to go out in a female sport, (Nordic skiing) Then the breaks are hit and the sign says, "no males allowed". So gender matters but not when it comes to a girl, female wanting on a boys team. I tried to tell him the hypocrecy (how ever spelled). Then it matters. No discrimination of high school sports when a female wants to try out for a male sport, but as always the male in our society finds out that there is nothing fair. A double standard. Because the truth is on average a male will be stronger, it is nature and is about the hormones. I once thought of training to be a ultra sound tech, but because I have male plumbing I cannot. Since as a male I cannot be a room with a naked woman..So my suggesting in sports is this, we should have equal teams or sports for both gender. But males should play on male teams and females on females team. I consider myself a liberal on many issues. But not in this area or in terms of medical jobs. What a crock PERIOD.

You completely missed the last temperature diagram. It shows the actual difference from the baseline, not the rate. Topday it is 1°C warmer than in 1860. Global emperatures did go down between 1940-1980.

"Too much complexity" Reminds me of when an arahat asked the buddha about the specific workings of karma. Thank you for sharing this!

the carbon dioxide warming issue is confounded by tons of grants for people that say co2 warming is a real threat. you can no longer get a grant if you want to show why over emphasing co2 as harmful is a political angle not a scientific one. the actual science question is how does earth's atmosphere and oceans cause and limit changes in earth's temperature in the long term. current computer models throw away a key factor because they can't simulate earth's cloud cover. too many clouds hold in heat. too few clouds means earth will cool off. heating and cooling can cause opposite trends at different time scales and different size scales. that is why we need to know what is the sweet spot for co2. it could be very broad so our attempts to limit it are pointless.

Would be interested in your scientific expertise when it comes to reviewing the work of paleo climatologist David Mauriello . th-cam.com/video/lvbDaIXaQl0/w-d-xo.html. is David blowing off steam but gives a taste of his research . Since it would take more than one video or interview to review his research you could go to his youtube channel www.youtube.com/@OppenheimerRanchProject . Pretty sure it would be very worthwhile . Steve Koonin's arguments are mostly ridiculous as you easily showed. Not sure you would have as easy a time with David Mauriello. And thanks for being willing to do these kind of reviews. So important !

That's a cute dog

Excellent video!! Congrats