Dr. Willie Soon

Music In the United States, we often refer to our main sources of energy as fossil fuels. Oil, gas, coal, they're fossil fuels because they come from fossils.
Ancient organic material, forests, jungles, plankton, dinosaurs. Held under the ground for millennia, they transform into oil, gas, and coal.
Everybody thinks that's true. On the other hand, there's evidence that maybe it's not the whole story.
If that's where fossil fuels come from, if that's how hydrocarbons are made, then how come they're found so deep under the oceans and at the top of the Earth? How come one of Saturn's moons, according to scientists, has more oil and natural gas than Earth? Were there dinosaurs and planktons in forests at one point on one of Saturn's moons? Probably not.

So if all hydrocarbons aren't from fossils, where are they from? And why isn't this commonly known?

And what are the implications of it? And what does it tell us about our modern climate change policy?

These are not just esoteric questions, they're central questions, actually, as we chart the

future of energy usage in the world. Willie Soon has been thinking about this for a long time.
He's an astrophysicist, a geoscientist. He spent 31 years at Harvard.
He recently left, and he joins us here. Dr.
Soon, thank you so much. Thank you, Tucker.
It's a blessing to be able to come on your show. Well, it's a blessing to have you.
And this is such an interesting question with so many implications. Yes.
And I want to spend most of our time talking about the implications. But just to the strict question of where hydrocarbons come from, it sounds like they're not necessarily all from ancient forests or plankton or dinosaurs, are they? Yes.
The story can be a bit long, so give me a few minutes to explain. You are certainly right, but most important to clarify is that the information that is found on the largest moon on Saturn, which is called Titan, is actually results from NASA, European Space Agency, and the Italian Space Agency, who built this spacecraft called Cassini and Huygen.
Actually, one of my thesis advisor committee is actually built the UV spectrometer. But the one that they used to discover this, basically the ocean liquid, liquid form of methane, which is in etane form, which is much more complicated hydrocarbon.
It's a whole ocean of it. Because Titan is in such a way that it's very cold, by the way.
So it's minus 290 degree Fahrenheit. Yes.
Hint, hint, hint. Where's the global warming there, right? If it's full of methane there, right? That's another problem because it's far away from the sun.
That's what it is. Yes.
And clearly that the question of abiogenic method, which means no need of any biology, is true. Because we know.
Actually, one experiment was done in 2009. It was done in Swedish Royal Academy, one of those groups.
But it was done by one Russian leader. He was able to show that if you squeeze methane, CH4 in chemical formula, so four hydrogen, one carbon, squeeze them in a form that in which they simulate the condition of the earth mantle, which is 1800 miles deep, below the surface, because the earth is deeper, right? And it's within this 18, but basically the condition that is only about 40 to 150 miles in, that you actually can form complex hydrocarbon.
You've got benzene, you've got ethane, you've got all these other stuff forming. So that proves beyond doubt that you have such a way to make this.
Plus that Titan proves beyond doubt. You actually see methane also.
In all the atmosphere, Jupiter, you know, you even find benzene in the rocks of Mars. And then for me, astrophysicist, I can tell you even more.
You find this complex hydrocarbon called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon. It's another one of those complex hydrocarbon.
Then actually you found it in interstellar space, between space within stars, intergalactic space, these are everywhere. Because temperature there are cold and probably the right pressure condition, all this complex hydrocarbons.
It's kind of incredible because all of us, including myself until very recently, assumed that all of our main energy sources are these so-called fossil fuels. And of course, their existence is going to be limited by the amount of fossils, by the amount of decaying organic material.
Not so. So if that's not so, then we need to rethink a lot of things.
A lot. I think this one fit into a paradigm, a famous economist that I like very much.
His name is Simon. Do you know about this guy named Simon? Julian Simon.
Yeah, the key guy. You see of Illinois and then Maryland.
He was the guy who said that the ultimate resource of humanity or earth is actually not all this material thing like uranium gold. Because uranium, there are far more uranium in the oceans than on the land, right? You have 4.5 billion tons of uranium in the ocean.
You have only 17 million tons of that. Gold, copper, what do you want on the ocean? It's all there except they're in very dilute form, clearly.
So the ultimate resource actually is not that, it's the human mind. It's the innovation part of it.
I think I like that principle a lot. It fits very well in terms of saying that it's all matter of cost, even oil.
Most, I don't know if any of you know, the audience know that 50 to 60% of the, I mean, all, actually all the oil that you already drilled, the drill hole, yeah, you can only pull out 40 to 50% of it. 60% of that remains in it.
Simply because there's not enough pressure to get it out. This is why the idea of abiogenic oil is interesting.
It's true, clearly true. It's all matter of cost, really.
Because this thing has to form way inside the earth, the mantle, which is 50 to 100 miles, right? Human, how deep have we ever drilled? Only the skin, which is only five miles maximum, five to six miles, basically. That's at most that we can drill.
And then all this stuff had to permeate into the reservoir. I got this information from the top.
People that physically have to look for oil every day. One of my friends, Joseph Lime Cooler from Beacon Energy, offshore energy.
Those are the guys who work day in and day out to bring us the energy, actually. The oil that we need.
So why don't most people know this? Why do most people think that the gasoline in their car was, by definition... Have to be limited, yeah.
Yeah, that there's just a tiny amount and it's going away. We'll never find more.
The world is full of untruth and half-truths, right? That's the whole problem, right? That's why for so long, even the idea that we are not limited and bounded by availability of, let's say, gasoline, petroleum, or coal. Coal now, they won't allow us to use, right? As you know, in COP meeting in dubai that just ended a day ago they just physically declared themselves that we should stop using fossil fuel basically petroleum natural gas and even coal i mean these people are insane now really insane i think they're gonna harm more people with their own delusion plus they always remember these are people who actually don't represent the majority.
Since when

are these put up to word? It's always about

this minority, the tyranny of the

few, always robbing the

whole senses, the good senses of the

good people. This is part of the reason why

as a scientist, I also speak out.

Feel, I mean, not afraid of anything

except for just telling the truth. And I'm

glad to have this opportunity to say such

thing in your show. So, I mean, if we haven't been telling the truth.
And I'm glad to have this opportunity to say such thing in your show.

So, I mean, if we haven't been told the truth

about where hydrocarbons come from,

and we haven't,

I mean, I've never met a single person in my life

who said, wait a second, they're not all fossil fuels.

Then we keep hearing there's a scientific consensus

on climate change.

Every scientist believes the same thing about it,

believes Al Gore and John Kerry.

Maybe that's not true either?

Oh, that I can tell you.

Please, thank you for asking that question, Tucker.

I've been working on this subject of CO2 causing climate change

or what other factors we can ask that cause climate to change

for close to as long as since my postdoctoral year 1991, right? So it's about 32, 31 years, 32 years. And on this question, I think we have a very definitive answer.
What we know now is CO2 ain't going to cost nothing. It's not going to change much of the climatic system, which means it won't change the speed of the hurricane.
it won't change how fast or how frequent tornado forms, it won't even actually make any difference to the polar bear population. It's all conservation issue, right, on polar bears.
It won't even cause how much fish you don't catch or catch, you know. It won't even cause what they call ocean acidification.
It won't even cause this problem that they claim. It's all artificial.
Everything they do, it's all dream from their model and the tyranny of the few again. That those few people just dream up this scary story that it just ain't true.
And then when you come down to the most responsible group for this kind of bad stuff, I was reminded by my colleague, Dr. Ronan Connolly and Michael Connolly, my two co-workers with me on my group, is to say that since I work so carefully and I have about more than 100 scientists the last three years alone working with me, so I don't speak on behalf of them, I speak on behalf of myself.
My view is that the UNIPCC, United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is one of the primary problems, which means they have been misleading people. They've been using authority of science, which is not true, right? It's all governmental hackers, basically, right? People like John Kerry, who I guess can barely take a proper physics class, who keep claiming that greenhouse effect is so simple, right? And then he refused to explain

how does it work, right? I mean, he did all of that. That is very terrible.
That really embarrassing

to America. He did that in Bali in Indonesia several years back.
That is just so embarrassing.

Do you think he can explain how it works? I don't think so. Even Al Gore who claimed to be

know something about science. I challenge Al Gore.
I did some of that in his face, actually. I was lucky enough to be in one of those Wall Street Journal eco-conference, and I was setting up with all the UC Santa Barbara students.
Please make sure when the question comes out, give me the mic. I was making friends with them the night before.
I explain now my details of my work. So I got the mic and asked questions about Al Gore.
Because one of the primary sad things that they refused to recognize, that I know you know that in even grade school sciences, CO2 is a gas of life. When you have more CO2, the plant kingdom, the whole ecology, even the oceans, gonna have more, basically, ability, more fishes, more everything.
More life. More life, essentially.
That's why it's called gas of life. And these people want to demonize it as some gas that can cause global warming, can cause hurricanes to run faster or weaker.
I don't know what they want. To have more rain, more droughts, and all this other nonsense that they claim.

All of that, it just ain't so.

That's the problem.

By the way, this is how serious I am.

I check everything they say.

I check.

As a scientist, you cannot just dismiss them.

You cannot laugh at them.

You cannot, you know, chide them.

You cannot just make joke of them.

You check everything.

So as a very serious scientist, and I publish scientific paper refuting all of this

I'm not sure. laugh at them, you cannot, you know, chide them, you cannot just make joke of them, you check everything.
So as a very serious scientist, and I published scientific paper refuting all of this argument, scientific paper maybe mean nothing to the average people, but it's really important, it's like a document, that you have to document, and then put out the proper scientific arguments about what is right, what is wrong. So that's what we have been doing at my particular center called series-sign.com.
So anybody who wants more information about this, please go to the website, right? And study what we do there because we are the one that is truly independent from any funding agency, any money that you could possibly give me, like Bill Gates, please don't give me money. Thank you.
And Al Gore, please don't give me money. Don't give me any money if you tell me what to do.
You know, even some of your money, I might not want it. But the point is that I want to be independent, just like you.
In the media, I want to be fearless. I just set my own agenda.
You don't tell me what to research either. I research what I want to research.
So we've been researching on many, many topics. So on the climate change issue, I'm fully convinced.
after all all these years even though we may not know exactly what is causing climate change we suspect it's the Sun we have a lot of evidence to show that it's probably the Sun very high percentage you know like was I would say 90% were sure but not 100% but we know carbon dioxide is not the gas it's not that what you call like your thermometer in your room, can adjust up and down that you can set the temperature to be whatever level you want it. First of all, they can never tell us what temperature do they want it at.
What is the temperature you want to set the global temperature? Al Gore has not been able to answer that. John Kerry has not been able to answer that because we know the temperature from the coldest in Siberia to the desert in Sahara.
I mean, these are huge, at least 100 degree or more kind of differences. Yes.
I mean, who are you to tell me which temperature is the correct temperature where you guys are talking like that? They are talking as if they are pseudo-God. They're God themselves.
I mean, these people are so ambitious that in some sense, I think we have to keep their ambition down a little bit. I mean, these people are not contented, just like what you put out there.
You cannot be ambitious when you're contented. But these people are so out of their mind in some sense that I think it's misleading.
And somebody had to speak out against them. I think you are one of those who consistently point out their hypocrisy, right? And I really find that the whole problem of this global warming is a complete nothing, which means we should do nothing about it.
Just go on and live life and adapt to it, right? Don Jr. here, guys.
Are you receiving letters from the IRS claiming you owe back taxes? As penalties and interest fees pile up, the IRS gives you no clear path to resolution. Don't speak to them on your own.
They are not your friends. To reach a team of licensed tax professionals that can help you reduce, settle, and resolve your tax matters, go to tnusa.com and check them out.
Solve your tax problems today. Call 1-800-780-8888 or visit tUSA.com.
That's 1-800-780-8888. Tucker says it best.
The credit card companies are ripping Americans off and enough is enough. This is Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas.
Our legislation, the Credit Card Competition Act, would help in the grip Visa and MasterCard have on us. Every time you use your credit card, they charge you a hidden fee called a swipe fee and they've been raising it without even telling you.
This hurts consumers and every small business owner. In fact, American families are paying $1,100 in hidden swipe fees each year.
The fees Visa and MasterCard charge Americans are the highest in the world, double candidates, and eight times more than Europe's. That's why I've taken action, but I need your help to help get this passed.
I'm asking you to call your senator today and demand they pass the Credit Card Competition Act. Paid for by the Merchants Payments Coalition, not authorized by any candidate or candidates committee.
www.merchantspaymentscoalition.com. Of course, I agree completely, but here's what I don't understand.
Global temperatures have dramatically fluctuated within the period that humans left records. I mean, not that long ago.
I mean, there are cities underwater because sea levels have risen within recorded history. The signs of the glaciers are all around us.
So that was all before the internal combustion engine. How do they explain that? This is the problem.
They admitted, a lot of them admitted. They willingly admitted.
You can read all the- You can't deny it. I mean, we had glaciers and then they melted because of global warming.
They are forced to confess. I mean, these are the confession time.
It's the sun, actually, that does a lot of this. The glacier, like, like, there's a period called Little Ice Age, you know, from about 1300 to 1900, you know, very cold.
And then there's a beautiful warm period from 880 to about 1200. You know, it was warm.
I mean, you can grow wine in England, right? And now you cannot grow wine, right? Things like that. I mean, Greenland was green back then.
But now it's full of glaciers. Ice is coming in.
So what are you talking about exactly? And it was the sun, actually. The sun fit quite well.
As far as we know, in terms of deducing the information of how does the sun, how bright was it, how dim was it. Basically, just like that.
Just the amount of light coming out from the sun. Very tiny percentage, by the way.
Very small. It's on the order of less than a percent, but it's more than enough because there's another effect that is very, very important.
It's basically because the sun, the earth is forced to go around the sun and then the orbit change ever so slightly because of perturbation from all the other planets. Yes.
You know Jupiter, Saturn and even Venus and Mars. They're actually controlling what we do and the Moon of course is very important.
But that other factors, the orbits plus the changes of the Sun by itself between how bright, how dim it is, these two factors can explain just about everything that we know. All the data that I have, actually.
So I've been studying. This is why I was so fascinated in studying this issue.
I spent my whole life, actually, studying this. Nothing but doing just this.
And the more I understand, the more I think that, wow, it's just a gap to be filled in. We have too much information that, and then these people come along, say that CO2 is causing everything.
I check, I check. Oh, maybe they're right.
I check as a scientist. I have to check them.
But then it's not even close. I mean, these people are talking about things like this.
I mean, you, there's a famous phrase by a very famous Wisconsin meteorologist. His name is Professor Reed Bryson.
He's one of the father of climatology, really. He just said that you go out and then you could, if you think CO2 is so, you might as well spit into the air and then see what happened to the airflow.
He was just basically saying that CO2 is nothing. It cannot cause the climate to change or anything.
It doesn't change anything, actually. It's the sun.
Why you think the most important things that you should talk about, they never talk about that. They always want to average the data.
The most important thing they should talk about, you know what, it's the season. No two winter are the same.
No two summers are the same. And they never explain that.
It's actually the orbits with the sun changing it ever so slightly. I'm not talking.
I have published papers, papers and papers and papers like that on all this to show and document why and how. That's what the fun part of doing science is not only chit-chatting, hand-waving like crazy.
Even though I may look like one now, but I have always very calm when you write down. Every time I have to write a paper, I always tell my wife, please, don't disturb me for a few days.
I'll be back. Things like that.
Of course, working at home, but I'll be back. So is there any way to predict what climate change will be based on...
Actually, you can because of the orbit. The only thing we don't know is how to predict the sun changes by itself because the magnetism, just the magnetic field on the sun is too complicated.
The sun is the magnetized ball, right? It's a gas, hot gas. It's about, you know, the magnetic field is so strong.
It's 10,000 times stronger than the earth. The earth is also a magnet, a bar magnet, basically.
It's one gauss. We have 10,000 gauss at least on the sun.
So it's a very different property and it works very differently because It's heated by basically a thermonuclear reaction inside the sun. So it's a very different property and it works very differently because it heated by basically a thermonuclear reaction inside the sun.
So it created all kinds of hot gas behavior that is very difficult to try to master or even to model using mathematical equations. Actually, it's much easier to study the earth than to do the sun.
So that's part of the problem in scientific tasks, the physics tasks. They're very then we learn a lot we learn a lot through just watching the sun i mean galileo galilea right he pointed his telescope he he was smart enough first he pointed to the jupiter the moon right jupiter then he saw the moon right he saw four moons around it and then he's smart that he go the next day to watch it again he watched and then he says started to move by the famous story of galileo galileo we'll talk about it someday when he wrote that down initially it was in italian when he realized he discovered something so unique he changed the language to latin in the next day yeah you know i got it that's a good one you know so he started writing in latin precise language okay but anyway for the sun One, it's really so complicated that actually I've been, man.
The good one. You know, so he started writing in Latin, precise language, okay? But anyway, for the sun, it's really so complicated that actually I've been studying this, actually, as long as you know me.
I mean, I studied this for so long. We know a lot.
I even wrote a popular book, actually, to try to explain why that during a period of the sunspot, so Galileo Galileo started in 1609, 1610 or so. So we have about now 413 years of data.
But there's a period that deep inside the Little Ice Age, 1645 to 1715, is called the Monder Minimum. Because during that period, the sunspot almost all disappeared.
Especially in the northern hemisphere. It disappeared completely.
Nobody knows why. And that's why the French astronomer, famous people like Cassini, the one that the Cassini spacecraft, he was observing at that time.
He said, man, this Galileo guy must be drinking too much or lying or things like that. He said there's a lot of sunspots, but when we observe at this time, we didn't see nothing.
What's wrong? But it's an actual phenomenon, right? My friend, my good friend, which is the number one world sunspot historian, he just wrote email to me, Douglas Hoyt. He actually was the master of this, collecting all the sunspot data, going back to all the major libraries, you know, from Galileo First Point all the way to present point.
Basically found that this phenomenon is true because during that period, the sun's point was not there, not because nobody was watching. It was at least observed 80% of the time during the 70 years.
You see, it's so unique, that period. But now we're beginning to try to learn what happened there.
So during that period, we really think that the sun was so much dimmer, was substantially dimmer. This is why you have this Little Ice Age phenomenon.
All the Thames River were froze. You know, we have the Thames River in England, well-known, and then all the ice skating thing, you know, in Holland, all the different culture.
And then these are all real, actual phenomenon. And then this day, they're trying to say that maybe Little Ice Age is not Little Ice Age.
They even try to change that in scientific field, actually. So this was very, very puzzling for me.
Why would they try and change that? Oh, I don't know, because they want to say that CO2 is controlling everything. They kind of want to have CO2 as the prime driver of everything.
This is part of the problem that I find. Well, that's not science.
That's lying. Ah, it's bad.
It's bad in science. This is why in science now, I'd rather say this thing outright.
I'd rather have questions that cannot be answered than answers that cannot be questioned. Because these people are just offering you the answer and then you should just shut up like you say.
Don't ask any questions. Don't criticize.
Don't even bother to think. Just accept what we say.
I mean, you may have known that. Actually, if you want to get there, I can talk about this because this is rather famous because the other person is still around.
He's the one who's shouting up and down these last two days to say that, oh, we must stop fossil fuel. GOP is so evil.
We must stop all of them because we are the, GOP are the evil political bodies in America that causes all this fossil fuel to be, we are using fossil fuel and all that. His name is Professor Michael Mann.
He's at the University of Pennsylvania. He created a paper, we call it the hockey shtick.
He basically say that the temperature history, first of all, the true temperature history looked like this. It was very warm from 800 AD, let's say warm, warm, and then it cools down.
About 1300 started to go down, cool. And then since about 1900 century, it started to warm back up.
Way, way before CO2 is important, okay? That's another puzzle that they never want to explain. That looked like this.
That's the real story. Michael Mann came along, said that, well, he used mathematical algorithm, okay, you can use fancy words, but believe me, it's just mathematical algorithm, that he produced a stick for 880 to about 1900 AD.
It's all flat because it changed. It changed a very tiny amount.
So small that actually it doesn't mean anything. 0.1 or 0.2 degrees Celsius.

So small. It doesn't mean the one that I talk about that changes one degree

at least, you know, to five, six times

bigger than what he said. And he

just said it like this, and then it warmed up

because of the blade,

which is the warming because of rising carbon

dioxide. But he forgot to explain to you

this warming

of the temperature started way

before even the human part of the

atmospheric carbon dioxide could be anything meaningful. This is part of the problem.
It's all been crazy from day one. When this thing was published in 1999, I was the first few guys who raised a hand at the back of the class and said, excuse me, Professor Mann, he used to be my friend, by the way.
Now he will never answer me. He used to exchange email with me because, you know, we more or less share the same passion, want to understand things.
Now he just say that his story, his story is the only one that is correct. But it's not bear out by any data that we know.
That's the problem. It's all mathematical products.
This is how scary the whole world can be. And United Nations, the IPCC group that I mentioned, promoted his work.
Turning him into a major hero because he has solved one of these old puzzle problems that climatologists over millennia have been trying to solve since the day of the Greeks to try to understand how climate change. And this guy come along and say that it looks like this, only CO2 does it.
And that's the problem. So, I mean...
It just ain't so... What you're...
I mean, some of this is very complex, but in the way you're describing it, if he's saying the warming period began before there was a meaningful addition of CO2 into the atmosphere caused by humans, even I can understand that. Yes, that's the truth.
I can say to my new Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, hey, find a keto-friendly restaurant nearby and text it to Beth and Steve. And it does without me lifting a finger.
So I can get in more squats anywhere I can. One, two, three.
Will that be cash or credit? Credit for. Galaxy S25 Ultra, the AI companion that does the heavy lifting so you can do you.
Get yours at Samsung.com. Compatible with select apps.
Your card's Google Gemini account results may vary based on input. Check responses for accuracy.
Your snacking routine can get a little dull. Time for an Oikos remix or light and fit remix.
Like a crunchy storm of sea salt, praline pretzels, dark chocolate, and butter toffee. showering down into So I would assume that lots of scientists who do this for a living might be asking the same question.
Why don't they speak up? This is the problem. The whole problem in science this day is related to funding, how science is funded.
That natural, that philosophy, I wish to not get too much into it. This is part of the reason why I want to be totally independent.
I get out of this whole system, right? But it's how science is about funding. Even if you don't get money directly, it will influence the graduate students and on and on and so forth.
All these other related effects, you know? And many people are afraid to speak out. But I tell you, if you really put all the scientists to an honest kind of polling, if it's science, but science is not about polling too.

All it takes is one to be correct.

Yes.

That's the problem, right?

Einstein used to, when he formulated the famous general relativity or special relativity,

actually, that was criticized, that basically talk about speed of light is constant.

So time and space are relative.

Yes.

Right?

Time can be dilated.

Space is also slightly different because the speed of light is constant. Special relativity is based on that concept.
Then 100 of these Berlin academicians try to wrote a fanflot, say that Einstein is wrong, but never offer why. What are the details that is wrong? And then Einstein indeed answer like this.
Why would you need 100? You know, if I were to be wrong, one would suffice. I mean, that's the theme of the science.
Science is so bad because it's so totally upside down, inside out. COVID is another case, you know.
So let's stick to climate stuff. People are afraid to speak up.
I don't know why, actually. I was young.
I had to worry about my three kids, where they eat and all that stuff. You know, buffet all the time, just kidding.
The greatest American invention. This is truly entrepreneur, by the way.
Anyway, we have enough food. No problem.
That's why food, I don't think is also a problem in this world. Even material resources, right? All you think is have to think like Julian Simon type.
You know, we can generate everything. The only problem we left is lack of imagination, narrow-mindedness, and all this anti-America sentiment, put it this way.
America is among the best hope for humanity, you know, to put forward. We have the foundation document, the constitution, for God's sake.
That is the most beautiful thing that we could ever imagine. And why don't we use it properly, right? People just trashing on it every day, right? Anyway, I digress.
Anyway, so yes, I think science is a problem now because of funding structure. People won't speak out.
I don't know why. I think it's natural for people to be afraid, but you can also be afraid for so long.
For me, I was frustrated because I was not afraid

ever since I was in science.

Because I'm in science because I love science.

This is why, from my own perspective,

I'm just very sad to see that science is being trampled

by all these other non-science forces, you know?

That's why when I look at COVID also,

I cannot stand by and say nothing.

On COVID-19, there are so many things wrong with it.

That's why I want to pre-advertise.

With my group, series.sign.com,

we work with a bunch of people.

One of the good guests for you potential

will be Professor Harvey Rich.

He said he's been interviewed by you twice.

Even guys like Bob Malone,

we work together, produce a paper.

So when the paper come out,

hopefully we can have them on your show

so they can tell more stories.

We want to provide the medical community or even the world to document this episode of Dark Ages in medical sciences. Something went terribly wrong.
The mask never really worked. The vaccine never really worked.
All of this doesn't work. The lockdown doesn't work.
And why are we doing this? Now they're trying to scare with another news scare. All over the world now.
Newaper. This morning, I just got one newspaper from my sister who has to start, oh, they start masking up in Malaysia now because cases have to increase the usual story.
I laugh in a serious way because I see this is another one of those attempts again to try to scare people. So I did digress now.
Science is just so complicated now that every aspect of the science that I look at, I've become very unhappy. Science is no longer able to do where science leads.
This is the theme of my series, that's science.com. We, with few only colleagues, I don't have enough funding.
I just hope to get as many donations, by the way. Donate, but don't tell us anything.
Do anything. Trust us because we are decent scientists.
You can look at our publication record that we are able to produce the most interesting and pure work. Like IPCC, they have to reply to us.
Two years ago, we published a very important paper. One of my journalist friend, a colleague, wrote a paper, newspaper article, and then he go and ask IPCC, why are you guys not signing this paper? They use the excuse to say that, oh, these people publish late.
We have a deadline here, red line. Oh, if you don't publish before some date, like 2021, okay, like January or 2021, then we won't include your work.
So we publish in August, so they won't include my work. But they forgot to say that they claim themselves, they proclaim UNIPCC, proclaim themselves to be the best of the scientific world, produce the most updated and all that but immediately their report came out they already outdated because they haven't included my work which is the most comprehensive review of how the Sun affect the climate that's the work we did this year, just two months ago, we published two more paper convincingly show that even the thermometer data that they show you is not what it is.
It's actually not measuring climate. It's measuring urban heat island changes.
Something that I think everybody can understand. If you go to the inner part of the big city like like TC is one of the best example.
I have graph to show that you go there inner city is much warmer than outside because of concrete retaining all the heat or you change all the surfaces or the you know the surface become impervious between there's no breathing, no water going in and out, things like that. And it's what we show is that it's not a phenomenon just on local science.
You average over this, you can see the effect all over the Northern Hemisphere. This is very powerful new work that we spend.
So concrete and asphalt raise the temperatures more than CO2. And that's what they're measuring.
And then they tell you this is global temperature. And then we provide an alternative.
We say, why don't we go look at rural station that is available?

And guess what our result found?

Completely different story from the picture, the narrative that's coming out from this data set,

thermometer data that combined urban and rural.

We show rural only.

We can tell you that you can immediately offer a different answer.

For example, it's the sun that does it. We show that.
But we don't know that it's the answer. We just simply show you that the IPCC and all these so-called scientists from NASA, NOAA, and all of them are not doing their due diligence.
They are putting you very bad quality data product. Not only that, they hide it.
Some of them, it's so difficult to get the data. But it should never be difficult to get data.
I'm sorry, Tucker. This is how the problem in science now is so many serious...
But I thought transparency of data was science. I was hoping.
I always believe in that. That's why everything that we publish is there.
Because we got it from somewhere. Here's the data.
Use it. Check us.
If we're wrong, tell us we're wrong. That is one thing that I can always promise you.
I'm not here to try to gain favor or anything. If I'm wrong and I don't know, I tell you I don't know, Thakka.
A lot of these things, I really under a lot of careful consideration. Really a lot of deep meditation, thinking about this topic.
What I think is very problematic. I, I'm so glad to have this opportunity to go this far to be able to talk for this long now, is that really the IPCC product is actually substandard.
Of course, they have a different mandate. Their mandate is political, right, to provide policy.
We understand that. But how many people really understand that pure science doesn't support anything they say? I mean, in the beginning of this COP28 meeting, the chairman, this guy from UAE, United Arab Emirates, the chairman, I don't know his name, Sultan Al-Jaber or something, he was saying that there's no scientific reasoning to say that we should face our philosophy.
He's right. But then he backed off because of all this, everybody's hurt mentality.
Everybody's doing the mad thing. Everybody, science is not about that.
They all agree now. They all agree to face out, right? For some kind of agreement.
You know, that everybody declared that they're going to do that. That they're going to face out for.
I don't even know how actually. Why? Why are you doing this? And then one of the claims is that they're going to triple the amount of solar and wind power.
That is a sad story. You know, of the amount that we spend that we can document, some 3.6 trillion dollars, they spend almost 2 trillion dollars on solar and wind power over the last, I don't know, 5, 10 years or so.
And then what they did is that they spent more of the money, 2 trillion on solar and wind. And solar and wind can only account for only 3% of the world power, 85% from fossil fuel, as you can see, hydropower and nuclear.
Nuclear is another puzzle. I checked with all my nuclear expert friends that have been working for years on nuclear power.
Nuclear power is one of the saddest story. I believe that we actually have almost a solution in hand.
Not the fusion, of course. It's the, you know, the fast reactor or the good generation of nuclear power.
Peaceful use of that won't even generate nuclear weapon. We can do all of that technology.
The only thing barrier is red tapes, environmentally scared of radiation, all these other problems. We almost have all of that in hand.
The power can last. One estimate shows that if we were to use it at the demand of that by 2050, we can have enough power for 2,700 years.
That's far more than any other fossil fuel can promise. And then, still not doing it.
America is so far behind now. We just make one in Georgia, one of the nuclear plants that is so over-caused because of all the red tape.
That is so embarrassing. There are numbers.
I mean, it's costing 1,000 or 2,000 times even more than what Korea and, you know, even Korea now is a major guy who make this nuclear power plant for any country who wants to do it, right? I mean, Korea, India, they are making a much cheaper cost. And the design, French designs are the best, right? French, they're all doing that.
And we're not doing it. China, of course, left and right doing that.
But we're not doing anything. We're trying to tell you that we're going to shut off fossil fuel.
Increase solar and wind? Are you joking? Even three times more will be 9%. I don't know.
Can you turn on your light only 9% or now? You should shut all this light off now. You're overusing it.
And it destroys the actual environment. Exactly.
Wind farms. This is a kind of a very bad incentive that they don't realize.
It's about this kind of people that is so out of their mind, in my view, that they really should be cautious. Somebody should just ping on their head.
Guys, don't, don't, don't keep saying those things. You better think twice or consult somebody that knows something that is honest, you know? You spent 31 years at Harvard.
Would you be able to say this out loud at Harvard? Actually, back then, I also didn't care, but most of the time, I get called into the director's office, this and that. They're always trying to tell, oh, why are you saying that? Why are you saying this? I say, well, I'm a scientist.
I should say whatever I want to say. Not only that, the problem when I was at Harvard, part of the reason I quit as I tried to explain is about JAP requirement, but another one is a bit of censorship.
I can only do certain things. I cannot do certain things.
Like I would never be able to write paper on COVID-19. I would never be able to work on, let's say, environmental air pollution issues, you know, like so-called NOx or SOGs and all this other thing or mercury and things like that.
I study a lot on those issues because I personally are concerned. So I dig into the literature, one thing after another, basically because I sleep very little.
So I really do a lot of things. I flip every rock, pebbles, anything you want.
So I study a lot and produce a result that is good enough that can be making a lot of scientific but I never publish them because they simply won't allow. They wouldn't allow you? Yes, it's about a matter of allowing because they say it doesn't fit the theme of the Center for Astrophysics.
So I don't want to talk back about the institution, but it is the finest astrophysics institution in the world. In terms of instrument building, in terms of technology, we can produce the best.
You know, you often look at the X-ray picture of the sun. Those are from very fine camera that we built that with multi-coding layers, because the X-ray, they come in very slowly and then they're gonna going to diffuse come up but we make very fine way to to catch them so they can come up so the image are crystal clear you can see all the structure on the sun it's made by my center they are they are good scientists except that when it comes down to a larger picture of science don't say this don't say that this and that and then all of that.
This is why even at Harvard, I quit taking money from NASA, NSF, all these other places in 2004 because I'm beginning to think that science being so unaccountable, funded by taxpayer, that all these people, it's so unconscionable. So I personally chose that.
That is nobody to blame but myself. But I chose to take only from foundation who are willing to give me money, right? So I wrote those kind of proposal and then got to go through the director's office, this and that, right? I have a very, very happy and fruitful career.
Everybody can look up my publication list. It's very long.
And not only that, it's not the number that counts. It's the quality of the paper.
I always want to remind people, I don't like talking about how How thousands of papers you write, this and that. It's not important.
Which paper that is really important for certain issues, that's important. If you are able to show that, that's good.
That's what I mean. All my papers are basically under a lot of this serious, serious thinking and serious evaluation, checking and rechecking, before I would care to write about anything.
Because you don't want to write anything that's wrong tomorrow. You want something that can write.
But science is basically garbage can now. These scientific papers.
I categorically would even make this statement. I would make the statement that about 80 to 90 percent of the paper published in so-called climate science today should not be published.
But everybody has NSF grant. Everybody has all these grants.
You see how the inflation goes? Just like the other day, you hear that Yale University, a large part of it, most of the students on 2022 or something all got grade A grade. Grade A, they diluted the grade.
But Harvey Rich assured me that in medical sciences and heart sciences, Harvey Rich is the professor at Yale University. He teach in the medical school.
So he say, no, not true. So he tried to assure me he has quality.
Maybe not in his class, but Harvey, not in any other class, right? Anyway. So I want to ask you, this is a kind of last topic, which is not related to this, but we talked about it off the air, and I think it's really interesting.

You were telling me that you see God or evidence of God in math.

Well.

Can you explain what you were saying?

And maybe I misread what you were saying.

No, no, no, no.

You did not.

I mean, I have been closer and closer to God in the sense that because it takes me a long time.

I'm rather rebellious.

You know, I have to say, damn it, God, you've got to prove it to me.

Show it to me, buddy.

Just kidding.

I'm sorry to anybody.

No offense.

But I really say it in that way.

You know, you talk to yourself in a sense.

But in many, many moments in history of physics or mathematics, things come out.

You see, mathematics, you know, is this very pure word that it seems to have no connection to real world physics. That's right.
It's true. It's a complex number.
It's one of them. But it appears in quantum mechanics, right? It's so beautiful.
But one of the things that sometimes you see in equation is so amazing. When you formulate, maybe it's not right.
Maybe it's this and that. You doubt yourself.
But one of the most beautiful equations was the one that derived by Paul Dirac. He's a professor at Cambridge University, but he retired in Florida, by the way.
He died in Florida, Tallahassee. I mean, it's a refuge for him because he doesn't like to talk.
He would sit there for five days and don't talk. One day, all of a sudden, he talked.
But anyway, he formulated, he's a beautiful man, you know, Paul Dirac.

He formulated this relativistic equation

for electrons. But

in one of the equations, the solution

comes out to be a negative sign.

Not only that, there's a square root

involved, so it's strange behavior.

There's a negative sign, but it has

the exact property.

Like an electron and all that stuff.

How come? Everybody say, you're crazy, you're stupid, this and that, right? He's not even way, he didn't, no sweat, buddy. He just say, I am right.
Many years later, a few years later, it is shown in Caltech by Carl Anderson to show there's actually such a thing called positron. You know, the opposite, the brothers of electron.
That's such a thing. And then if you ask yourself, how is it possible? Right? There's something, this is out of nowhere.
Where does this thing come from? And then in mathematical sciences, there's a lot of things like this, like geometry. There's an even more famous thing about in geometry.
It's called Calabi called Calabi-Yau manifold that related to string theory. This thing was basically a revisit of Einstein's general relativity equation, asking itself whether is it possible to have close curvature in space-time that you actually don't require even gravity to be there.
And they show that Calabi was trying to prove this Yau. Xing Yao is one of the great mathematicians, right? He's at Harvard, but he retired.
Now he go to China, right? He was the one who tried to disprove this thing, but he turns out to be true. That is true that you can have close curvature in space-time that without gravity even.
So that added even more reach in this world than from mathematics to real world. We already have enough hard time understanding Einstein.
This guy added even more. And his discovery was in the 70s and things like that.
So there's so many examples and incidents like this. Just have to tell you that you have to bow down.
You have to occasionally take a deep breath. You know, there may be some ever presence of these forces, these forces that allow us to illuminate our life.
And I tell you, God has given us this, all this light that tell us that we have to follow the light and do the best we can. Rather than everyday devouring planet us saying that we are the Satan, we are the evil people.

You know, these people are constantly trying to,

you know, make all of us a lesser human being.

I would never allow them anyway.

So, good luck, you know,

for those people like Al Gore and all that

who think that they're high and mighty, right?

And trying to always, always lecture us

on got to cut down on fossil fuel

because we're going to hurt the planet Earth.

I say, Al Gore, do you ever think twice

Thank you. always, always lecture us on got to cut down on fossil fields because we're going to hurt the planet Earth.
I say,

oh God, do you ever think twice?

Who are you to think

that you can actually try to save the

planet Earth even? Because they always use

the word, I'm trying to save the planet Earth.

I don't know who gives them the right to save the planet Earth.

Same with this experiment

that they're trying to do, by the way. The experiment

to say that we must cut down CO2 emission.

I told you CO2 is good for, you know, for life.

Because I asked Al Gore, indeed, when I asked Al Gore the question in UC Santa Barbara,

is what?

Is that CO2 is gas of life.

Who gives you the audacity to cut down this?

Then aren't you, are you going to be responsible for the ecological and humanitarian, all this

crisis? Even we know rising CO2 affects even plants, especially food production, right? Maybe not exact number we know, but it does positively, right? We have technology to help it, better seed, better all this fertilization, all this other thing. But who gives them the idea to do that, to cut down, because it's generally going to be good for life, because you have to push them around, because nobody should give them authority.
So far, I don't think anyone can answer that question for me. So I tell them to please bow down to God.
Really answer to that question first before you do anything else, because it's ridiculous for them to keep to claim that they have the upper moral and ethical high ground to try to prescribe everybody to live in certain condition that they chose but they themselves don't follow the rules and they tell us to take a bus elgo always tell even tell people to take a bus elgo my god i say elgo you take a bus from tennessee to massachusetts i'll be waiting for you down there please i mean these guys just out out of the, out of the, Elgort, you take a bus from Tennessee to Massachusetts, I'll be waiting for you down there. Please.
I mean, these guys are out of this world, man. I'm sorry, Elgort, but you can still call me.
Can you, Willie Soon, thank you. But before you go, last thing, for viewers who want to know more about what you do, can you say once again where they can read it? Yes, please, I hope that I don't disappoint anyone, but please come to series-sign.com.
And I want to make one plug for my good friend, Hal Shurtleff. As I get older and older, including my own kids, my own three kids have been going to the CAM Constitution at New Hampshire.
And we also wanted to invite Tucker Carlson to come because Vivek Ramaswamy came last summer. And because we are a very, very small group, we are a tiny little group called CAM Constitution.
So, CAMConstitution.net. We offer basically family, kind of a Christian kind of a background, but we don't talk about Christ all the time, but we talk about Bibles,

we talk about constitution,

we talk about science.

So I'm the science instructor.

I've been doing that for almost six, seven years now.

So I've been doing every year,

I will give one or two classes,

depends on how many,

whatever they want me to do, I'll do.

And my own kids came to those things. And then, you know, we play music,

we have campfire.

It's a family event.

Used to be that's focused on kids.

But this day, I'm sorry, too many adults started to come.

So we have even people like my good friend,

Lord Christopher Moncton from England, he spoke twice.

So, small little group, but if anybody who thinks that,

you know, you have the time and even come and learn

what we do here and emulate in your own city and towns and all that, You know, people from Wisconsin, please come. People from California, please come.
You know, we have it in New Hampshire every year. Every summer, we have this camp and it's a very good thing.
So campconstitution.net, okay? And I talked to your friend, Vince Allison from Maryland. I also called him before I came.
He's one of the good guys, right?

Yeah.

Amazing.

Willie Soon, that was the most interesting conversation I've heard in a long time.

Well, thank you for your time.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thanks.