19:40 Which is reasonable, but denier just assumes bigotry. And it also is associative because the first usage of the word denier in a political sense was the Holocaust deniers. And so you associate in your brain immediately a guy who's completely wrong. And they used that word to an extreme in The Guardian. Denier, denier, he's a denier. Well, unfortunately I think there was a meeting to which John you and I were not invited. Again. Yeah, and the meeting was, okay let's turn up the heat. We've got all these emails out there from the CRU. It's pretty clear that the science was not in and a lot of funky stuff was going on. We got caught with our pants down. Time to turn up the heat and boy is it being turned up. Yeah, no kidding. Whoa.
20:35 20 times more PR than ever. Things are going to be worse than ever, blah blah blah. It's one of those tricks. I ran into a guy on the blog once who had a robot that he was posting comments all over the place. And, but they were all, they made some sense, but it was done by a bot, we found out later, because I got a hold of the guy. And he had some bad PR on the internet about him. And so he wanted to bury it by just... Yeah, by posting shit. Yeah. By posting tons of stuff. So he set up this robot and started posting things. And what it would do is take a look at a, at a,
21:13 subject line, the first paragraph. It would extrapolate some sentence having to do with it. And it actually made sense. There's a couple of like, I really enjoyed your post about subject. Yeah. Gee, you might want to take a look at this bitly link. Yeah, I know I get that. I got a lot of that kind of spam. But it's right because then what happens is when you go to Google and try that now with ClimateGate, you're going to see that there's so much obfuscation. Thank you. Perfect word. so much obfuscation going on that you have to get into seven or eight pages deep, but let's face it, most people won't do that except us, before you get to anything. And the latest, and you watch, you watch this one propagate like wildfire from the same people who once again prove to you that jet fuel can bring down steel buildings, scientific American David Bielo
22:11 has published an article which I think will get some big legs. Scientific American is of course still regarded as a very upstanding magazine, would you agree John? It's become a propaganda tool for years. Of course it is, but people still believe, oh, Scientific American. So this David Bielo has written this article titled... How do you spell Bielo? I'm gonna look him up. B-I-E-L-L-O. Oh, I've already looked him up and I've got some stuff we have to listen to. Climate change cover-up? You better believe it. Yeah, that's the story. I saw that. So, and right there on the graph, you know, right there at the top of the article is a graph of the temperature shooting up and I can feel my ass getting hot just looking at it.
22:53 Was Senator James Inhofe right when he declared 2009 the year of the climate contrarian? A slew of emails stolen from the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit highlight definite character flaws among some climate scientists. I love it. Here it comes. Character flaws, including an embarrassing attempt to delete emails that discuss the most recent reports from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, while also exposing what looks like a failure of scientists to acknowledge a halt to global warming in the past decade. Sadly, For the potential fate of humans... Oh, I love the adverb. Sadly, for the potential fate of human civilization, rumors of the demise of climate change have been much exaggerated. This, of course, is a throwback to rumors of my death have been grossly overstated. Who said that?
23:38 I think Mark Twain said it once. Yeah, I think it is Mark Twain. The past decade recorded nine of the warmest years in recent history as well as the rapid dwindling of the Arctic sea ice blah blah blah blah blah so it just keeps on going. Judge for yourself, etc. etc. There's all this stuff in there. There is in fact, he says, a climate conspiracy. It just happens to be one launched by the fossil fuel industry to obscure the truth about climate change and delay any action. And this release of emails right before the Copenhagen conference is just another salvo and a highly effective one in the public relations battle, redolent with the scent of the same flaks and hacks who brought you Smoking Isn't Dangerous.
24:25 So now we're cancer deniers, essentially. I like the jump of logic to associative, by the way, always is associative. So now the climate change deniers are the same people as those who think smoking is not dangerous. But nobody ever thought smoking was not dangerous. I mean, for one thing, the only people who were the apologists for the tobacco industry that come out and they keep saying this, but nobody in their right mind believed it. And the fact of the matter is that this analogy stinks. It's a phony baloney analogy this guy's making here to try to catch people's brain. What he's trying to do, he's basically turning it around and saying, oh yeah, and of course it's the oil companies. While in fact the oil companies I believe are really on the side of Copenhagen. Those guys want it. They're all in cap and trade. They're all for it. They're going to make out like bandits. They love it.