You can see why Jeremy Corbyn wont be interviewed by Andrew Neil - he wouldn't let the Labour leader get away the usual dodging and avoiding the question that is his tactic .
@@alanpartridge2140 that's because he is so evil, he doesn't realise how stupid and evil he sounds, JC and all the lefty loonies voting for him probably think it was a good interview, antisemitic piece of @#$% that he is!
Diesel has put more food on the table and built more infrastructure than you could imagine. The Tractor is the best labour saving device in the world. Coff Coff green peace and eat your cake with a clear piece of green mind.
To put it simply, they don't live in the real world, and you are right about diesel tractors, whether you farm organically or otherwise, virtually no one does so by human or horse power.
Modern diesel vehicles built within even the last 5 years are substantially cleaner than ones produced even in the early 2000s. Volvo claim that a 2017 Volvo bus engine emits 97% less overall pollutants than ones built in 2000. NO2 levels of diesel passenger cars fell drastically with the introduction of DPF filters and Ad Blue, actually beating some petrol cars. Audi say that a 2007 diesel car emits the same amount of smog as 30 2017 diesel cars. Let technology naturally progress rather than forcing and bullying the public
I agree with a lot of what you have said there, however - Audi/VW have lost credibility on emissions related matters following their 2015 misdemeanours.
scott c VW produced some of the cleanest Euro 6 engines available, and they were doing so before the diesel gate scandal arose. They also weren’t the only manufacturer using cheating software, most of the other major manufacturers were doing exactly the same thing. People who say that they won’t drive a VW because of the pollution they produce are probably driving a vehicle that produces more pollution than a VW would anyway. www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/19/many-car-brands-emit-more-pollution-than-volkswagen-report-finds
johnnste1 Vw & Bmw & Daimler Benz all use Bosch diesel emissions and injection suite. Frankly - a guardian article is not a trusted or credible source in any respect.
In the 1980's, Greenpeace stated that they wanted a worldwide ban on chlorine for reasons that were not clear. It was pointed out by Doctor Patrick Moore (a co-founder of Greenpeace), that most of modern chemistry was based on Chlorine and to eradicate it would take civilisation back into the dark ages. Greenpeace quietly dropped this demand.
I grew up in the forties when fog was so thiick when it happened you did not know where you were. The buildings were black and grimy and what a wonderful thing it was when action was taken and clean air became a feature of daily life and when cleaned those buildings and marvelled at what was underneath. That is why I am not happy with fossil fuels and support their replacement. However Climate Change is another issue. The climate is constantly changing and when I see ice caps expanding to levels never recorded, and the hurricanes decreasing rather than increasing, the rising sea levels promised not happening, an evasion of the failure of rising temperatures being covered up by sudden reference to the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, I do ask for false information to be eradicated.
The idea that you can take action on the scale necessary to alter the CLIMATE is staggeringly stupid. As the late George Carlin said "The Earth is doing just fine.....the people are fucked."
At 1:09 Presenter: "Look, here are all the facts for you to see..." Greenpeace Marxist: "No, no, no. You don't understand. My political opinions trump all your facts! Got it?"
Lying by omission is still a lie. Missing out the words "contributes to" and "premature" changes the 40,000 claim dramatically. Greenpeace is chasing a ghost utopia.
One of the big problems with many of those who passionately embrace a good cause is that they easily fall prey to a willingness to exaggerate. They seem too dim to realise that their figures will eventually be scrutinised, challenged, contradicted, and this whole process is deeply counter productive to the often very sensible things they wish to achieve..
The willingness to exaggerate comes from their intention to alarm in order to cause people to react. They believe that if they tell the truth, people won't care enough.
When you're an ideologue you cannot be reasoned with. No matter what evidence is shown to you it's critical not to give an inch no matter how absurd your claims. This works if you're head of Greempeace, a Remain advocate or supporting multiculturalism.
nick goodman I was just making the point that he picked out three examples of what I suppose would be termed progressive political positions, when in the current polarised climate
nick goodman I suppose if I’m honest, what I’m also saying is that I suspect him (and probably you) to be part of the problem - i.e. people utterly wrapped up in their own opinions, which they have a complete inability and unwillingness to examine. Not that I’m saying I necessarily disagree with your opinions. Anyway maybe I’m wrong - like I say, it’s just my suspicion.
This guy is nuts, however, as a rural guy I am always amazed how dirty my clothes get after a day walking around London compared to my small town. That can't be great on your lungs.
"Stephen Vince8 months ago Jeez you have no idea how it was in he fifties......you couldn`t see across the road..." Yep I believe you, an old friend was a lorry driver back then and got lost on one of his regular trips to London. Had to stop to ask a copper for directions as air pollution was so bad he couldn`t see 15ft in front of him. He said the air stank. Took a little something so he didn`t fall asleep on his long journeys.
@@rattusnorvegicus4380 Every house had at least 1 coal fire back then, terraced houses 3 or 4, and cars were minuscule in number compared to today. Houses caused smog back then, not transportation.
Greenpeace seem to be aiming for an unrealistic target of 0 emissions- impossible. but they seem happy for us to pay environmental taxes because we don't reach it.
Cycle lanes were introduced in London recently at enormous expense, taking away road space from vehicles, and now traffic is stuck in queues emitting lethal fumes into the atmosphere.
In the long-run cycle lanes will be good for the environment. I remember the howls of protests surrounding the pedestrianisation of Trafalger Sq. (taxi drivers in particular) which In the short-term may have caused bottle necks of traffic but who would want to turn the clock black? Human beings are amazing , but very change resistant.
"Get rid of CO2"! It's essential to life! Essential to photosynthesis. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace left when it decided to "get rid of" chlorine - an element- essential to vast amounts of materials. Greenpeace exists to justify itself and its income.
This guy's funding depends on him saying things are getting worse. Reccomended: videos of Greenpeace co founder Patrick Moore who has some very surprising views.
The 64 thousand dollar question is: If you get rid of diesel tomorrow, what will you use instead? It's nice to speak theoretically, but that doesn't solve the tough problems.
Emilio Jaconelli........the intention is in the future that poor people will not be allowed cars.......we will be made to work within 1 mile of our homes and will be paid with credits on a card or chip.........if you defy the govt then your credits/chip will be turned off until you comply.
The founder of Greenpeace(Dr Patrick Moore) has stated repeatedly that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, it is in fact at one of the lowest levels in history at 400+ PPM and if it was to be reduced to less than 130PPM ALL LIFE ON EARTH WOULD CEASE!! pollution is not the same as greenhouse gases. This interviewee kept on about asthma in children in cities one thing his study did not cover was the quality of air inside vehicles. Most of these children will be driven to school and back and not allowed to play outside for FEAR of injury or abuse by overprotective parents, but actually putting them in more danger through lack of exercise that leads to obesity etc.!!
The tragic moment is. "We can argue facts all day but..." This shoes that this person is ideologically possessed and doesn't want to get bogged down with what is true or not. He wants to concentrate on the moral propagander that makes him feel virtuous.
I think if you believe the air is as polluted as for example the 1980s you are deluding yourself. Pollution levels have dropped hugely in 30 years and it's a great thing that it has.
“No I didn’t mean 40,000 deaths” “I meant 40,000 premature deaths” 😂 “No I didn’t mean it was equivalent to smoking 15 cigarettes a day” “I meant it was equivalent to passively smoking 10 cigarettes a day” 😂
I remember when every one had a coal fire, every town had a coal fired power station and the town was covered in a blue haze but asthma was very rare. I think we need to look elsewhere for the cause, namely food preservates and additives. Also any one remember acid rain which they said was dooming us? Not a whisper now!
Hugo Lindum asthma can also be brought on by parents using detergents and spray cleaners in homes, so kids can’t build up an immune system, and the chemicals in cleaning products affect the lungs..........worth considering eh?
@@ianlegg9765 ; I agree with you. I am an asthma sufferer and the severity of it has changed as I changed my lifestyle. During the late 80's and early 90's I came close to death during a few attacks and lost long periods at work because of it. Today I don't even have an inhaler and it's not a problem. The difference, I believe, is my lifestyle and the food I'm eating. I've lived in big cities, in the countryside, by the sea, in the hills and none of it seemed to have an effect on it. In fact, I lived in a rural area, 40 Km from the nearest city, when it was at it's worst. Now I live in a large town, close to an industrial area and two major roads and I've no problems.
Hi, I think we're on to something re adatives and preservates. I think the horrifying increase in childhood cancer is also caused by these. I know a florist who provides flowers to the RVI childrens cancer unit Newcastle (deceased )and she says the numbers are horrifying. On the same theme we have recently put 3 of our house cats to sleep through cancer. (Liver×2 ,throat )No they didn’t drink or passive smoke. The common denominator was eating 100. % processed food! .
@@ianlegg9765 ; Stress also plays a role. Children today don't play like we used to and are expected to conform in a way that is unnatural; especially young boys, while girls are expected to be more masculine and work in areas they wouldn't choose naturally. The stress that the changes society bring are often felt from a very young age, for example, young boys are not allowed take part in the rough and tumble games of old while still in kindergarten. Self expression is limited while conformity is demanded. Children feel the pressure of this and it effects their physical, as well as their mental well being. The biggest change in my lifestyle is the level of stress I have and I attribute most of my improvement to that.
It does and we need to do our best to reduce it in a rational manner. We also have advances in the medical world all the time which keeps us all alive longer which massively outweighs the negative aspects of pollution.
He is a master interviewer... and joining the new UK news station with Nigel Farage which is being launched by Rupert Murdoch :) More fantastic interview to come.
Experts don't like being proven wrong. It's fair to say that over time we have been cleaning up our act, and we need to continue to do so. But only when suitable alternatives become available and we are not quite there yet.
What puzzles me is the fact that there are thousands of gardens in the UK with enough ground to have a tree within it that do not but in their proposals they don't encourage home owners or expect home owners not to have one or more!
Gordon Brown is responsible for the popularity of Diesel when he lowered the BIK on Diesel company cars in the early noughties. In Europe, Diesel is king.
The director of Greenpeace earns 90k per year, wow unbelievable,a wage most of us can only dream of. Give us a vote on paying for climate change that we are still waiting for the last 60 years to happen,.
Note how when confronted with facts he suddenly changes from IS to COULD BE causing.......... Often when you read the actual research that these guys use to support their cause the research doesn't actually say what they claim.
What I can't get my head around is with air quality being vastly better nowadays than it was in the 60's and 70's when I was growing up; why is there so much more asthma diagnosed now? It can't be air polution levels, as air pollution is far less than it was in my youth.
I went to a meeting with my council recently. Levels of NOx have gone down over the last few years. They are below the recommended danger levels. When I asked the reasons they said likely down to newer fleets (I think that means new cars). There was a problem around the time of the Volkswagen scandal but things are still improving.
I work/drive in and around London. It's very rare to come across a car/van that is chugging out noticable fumes. I very much doubt that was the case 20 years ago.
All they do is talk about eco issues but never actually do anything. I plant apple seeds in pots and plant them on common land near me. I’ve also done the same with sycamore shoots, ash and oak. I’ve planted 9 saplings so far in the last year and have 24 growing in pots in my garden in my small terrace house garden. That’s actual doing something! Not much I admit but it is actually something. Flying around the world and scolding people does absolutely nothing.
The key question is if the levels of PM10's and PM2.5'S were so high before and much lower now should we not be seeing a significant reduction in respiratory effects in modern children over that of children of the 1970's??????? or are we once again barking up the wrong tree?????
When I was growing up in the early 60's the smog in london was so thick you could not see more than 6 feet in front of you. But I am still alive, only just, but still alive.
'CHILD ABUSE'! The tactic of failed 'politicians' and 'charity' operatives down the decades, when they are losing an argument. Bring the "little children" into it, as though the "far right" doesn't care for "little children", and so we win the argument by default! WHAT CRAP! Simple 'child abuse'!
Like so many campaigners who make claims he twists the facts to suit his case, ignores facts and speaks at pressure in order to overwhelm the interrogator.
It will be many years before diesel hgv and delivery vehicles can be swapped out. But diesel cars can be fased out. Look to more economic petrol cars. Or synthetic fuels.
So if Diesels are so bad, how come Asthma and other diseases have massively increased, even though levels of air pollution have been dropping hugely since the 70's? When I grew up in the 70's and 80's I didn't know anyone with asthma. Now everyone's got asthma or ADHD or Dyslexia or Autism etc etc etc. I drive a Diesel van and another for work. My own van runs on veg oil, which is 60% less polluting than Diesel, so why isn't Government encouraging alternative fuels alongside other measures? While we're at it, why aren't these hundreds of thousands of new houses that are going up all over the country, carbon neutral? Why aren't they fitted with air source heating and solar panels if the Government is so 'right on' about saving the planet? Agenda's and lies. Just like the General election.
yeah lets do away with diesel cars, vans, lorries, busses, trains, oh and ships too. Mmmmm this will make a huge difference. No goods or foods in the shops, no work, no incomes ....... mmmmm yeah lets do this then since air pollution levels are reducing. They have known about pm10 for 25 years and have done nothing about it, so why now, other than it is during a tory government !!!!!
Mel Royale There are always alternatives, if we can put in the brain power to make something as sophisticated as diesel engines then we can do the same for alternatives.
yes but my point is our daily lifestyle depends on diesel motors. And the numbers supposed to die from diesel fumes is well misleading. No one wants air pollution. But it is the case that people "use" diesel motors to sustain their lifestyles, then complain about the air pollution such lifestyles produce, as if its nowt to do with the individual. You are correct in that the hydrogen fuel cell will be fantstic. But it depends on when we are allowed to have them.
Mel Royale our lifestyle does depend on diesel motors and that needs to change. It's that simple, I don't care about people complaining about the environment who are also using diesel, they're also the problem. phase out diesel over a period of time it's not rocket science
Mel Royale Hydrogen as you said would be perfect but a more realistic idea would be electric that is already being used today. unfortunately it's gotten to the point where we're going to have to sacrifice things like our economy and our imported goods for the sake of the planet. it's easy to say "but we need a strong economy, we need ships and airplanes" but if you carry on with fossil fuels you'll have another 200 or so years left and then bam, no ships, no economy, no nothing. If we had acted a couple of decades ago we could have ensured a smooth transition from fossil to renewable but it's too late now. it will be abrupt and difficult to change, but it is absolutely necessary for our long time survival.
The Australian High Commissioner at the time Alexander Downer had years earlier signed a controversial agreement with the government of East Timor for mining of gas and oil reserves in the Timor Gap. Strange he didn't mention it.
*Air Pollution is on account of living on a 'windy island' soon dispersed and thinned out to negligible levels. It's those warm summer nights when the wind in the wrong direction I get a distinctly foul whiff from the Sewage Works just over 1 mile away.*
when you look at the distribution of children with breathing problems, with the distribution of any air pollution, there is little if no actual relationship. Diesel does not kill 100,000 people each year. It is known that some people are susceptible to air pollution, which can come from all vehicles, together with fumes from our home, including carbon monoxide from central heating. Singling diesel cars is wholly inaccurate
Andrew is a great interviewer no doubt. I just feel that he knew exactly where he wanted this to go and was just a little to eager to get there. If someone is wrong let them finish as they will still be wrong but let them argue against themselves. Better to let someone speak with confidence and belief in what they are saying and then counter with facts, this will have a greater reaction and they will have less reason to dismiss you. The other guy maybe wrong but at least he is doing what he thinks is right to fix the problem. Are we?
If you asked the guy should we then switch from using diesel cars to petrol he would say no. Switching to petrol, same articulates from modern direct injection petrol engines as diesel, would dramatically increase Co2 emissions. If you care o look at the official environmental website you will find that one of the biggest sources of Nox is burning natural gas. The truth is that Greenpeace wants us yo use no energy whatsoever excepting their delegates travelling by air to exotic destinations to stay in five star hotels at our expense whilst telling us he to live our lives. Anyone old enough to to remember what London air quality was like pre 1960's laughs about claims that London's air is now poor.
I would be interested to see if there was an increase in the amount of emission sources . If the amount of cars etc have gone up over the last decade but the amount of emissions has remained the same, it's still positive
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Big mistake BBC cancelling This Week
Best political programme ever chaired by the best political interviewer ever
Andrew Neil, the best interviewer on TV today. He never lets go.
Andrew is great interviewer, he even "destroyed" Ben Shapiro. 😁
Brilliant interview Andrew, spot on for putting this fool right on his crap that he is Spoutting.👍👍👏👏
Martyn Anstis
Do you mean that he is still on his first interview?
Or are you wrong?
I'd like to see Andrew Neil against Jordan Peterson.
So far the best interviewer I have seen. You better be prepared before going on
Don't let facts get in the way of a political argument !!!!!!
Andrew Neil is the toughest interviewer in the anglosphere. An absolute star.
Like a bulldog!
"Angloshere"? He might argue that point...considering he's Scottish:-)
Tucker Carlson is way better. Sorry.
@@paulcunnane4 No he isn't, I've never heard of him.
@@paulcunnane4lmao tucker Carlson was too busy bootlicking ben shaprio whereas this dude ripped him to fucking shreds.
If you ban diesel, how will a Waitrose delivery van deliver your champagne and caviar?
Amcor09 Deliveroo?
Amcor09. Yes, to their lovely houses in the Cotswolds!
Amcor09 don’t forget the cigars
Electric Vans !!
Ha ha most lib dems , greens love their champagne and £10 cabbages grown in a friendly envirnoment
You can see why Jeremy Corbyn wont be interviewed by Andrew Neil - he wouldn't let the Labour leader get away the usual dodging and avoiding the question that is his tactic .
He did, it didn't go so well.....
@@davidgadsdon5200 ABC Anyone But Corbyn
@@davidgadsdon5200 At least he had the balls unlike BoJo
@@benhersko2830 And BoJo runs away
@@alanpartridge2140 that's because he is so evil, he doesn't realise how stupid and evil he sounds, JC and all the lefty loonies voting for him probably think it was a good interview, antisemitic piece of @#$% that he is!
Diesel has put more food on the table and built more infrastructure than you could imagine. The Tractor is the best labour saving device in the world. Coff Coff green peace and eat your cake with a clear piece of green mind.
To put it simply, they don't live in the real world, and you are right about diesel tractors, whether you farm organically or otherwise, virtually no one does so by human or horse power.
Let’s buy a horse and cart. Go back in time😆
U mean vegan cake
"There's too much pollution.. now give me all your money!!!"
Modern diesel vehicles built within even the last 5 years are substantially cleaner than ones produced even in the early 2000s. Volvo claim that a 2017 Volvo bus engine emits 97% less overall pollutants than ones built in 2000. NO2 levels of diesel passenger cars fell drastically with the introduction of DPF filters and Ad Blue, actually beating some petrol cars. Audi say that a 2007 diesel car emits the same amount of smog as 30 2017 diesel cars. Let technology naturally progress rather than forcing and bullying the public
And we all remember Volkswagen cars programmed to lie to emissions inspectors.
I agree with a lot of what you have said there, however - Audi/VW have lost credibility on emissions related matters following their 2015 misdemeanours.
scott c VW produced some of the cleanest Euro 6 engines available, and they were doing so before the diesel gate scandal arose. They also weren’t the only manufacturer using cheating software, most of the other major manufacturers were doing exactly the same thing. People who say that they won’t drive a VW because of the pollution they produce are probably driving a vehicle that produces more pollution than a VW would anyway. www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/19/many-car-brands-emit-more-pollution-than-volkswagen-report-finds
johnnste1 sure thing.
johnnste1 Vw & Bmw & Daimler Benz all use Bosch diesel emissions and injection suite.
Frankly - a guardian article is not a trusted or credible source in any respect.
In the 1980's, Greenpeace stated that they wanted a worldwide ban on chlorine for reasons that were not clear. It was pointed out by Doctor Patrick Moore (a co-founder of Greenpeace), that most of modern chemistry was based on Chlorine and to eradicate it would take civilisation back into the dark ages. Greenpeace quietly dropped this demand.
Current demand would also take us back to the dark ages, candle powered phone chargers anyone.
Stop tying to disrupt my narrative with facts!!!
I grew up in the forties when fog was so thiick when it happened you did not know where you were. The buildings were black and grimy and what a wonderful thing it was when action was taken and clean air became a feature of daily life and when cleaned those buildings and marvelled at what was underneath. That is why I am not happy with fossil fuels and support their replacement. However Climate Change is another issue. The climate is constantly changing and when I see ice caps expanding to levels never recorded, and the hurricanes decreasing rather than increasing, the rising sea levels promised not happening, an evasion of the failure of rising temperatures being covered up by sudden reference to the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, I do ask for false information to be eradicated.
The idea that you can take action on the scale necessary to alter the CLIMATE is staggeringly stupid. As the late George Carlin said "The Earth is doing just fine.....the people are fucked."
At 1:09 Presenter: "Look, here are all the facts for you to see..." Greenpeace Marxist: "No, no, no. You don't understand. My political opinions trump all your facts! Got it?"
what the fuck are you talking about
I love it when they can’t even answer the first question. You can tell immediately that he’s an ideologue and AN is gonna give it to him.
Lying by omission is still a lie.
Missing out the words "contributes to" and "premature" changes the 40,000 claim dramatically.
Greenpeace is chasing a ghost utopia.
One of the big problems with many of those who passionately embrace a good cause is that they easily fall prey to a willingness to exaggerate. They seem too dim to realise that their figures will eventually be scrutinised, challenged, contradicted, and this whole process is deeply counter productive to the often very sensible things they wish to achieve..
The willingness to exaggerate comes from their intention to alarm in order to cause people to react. They believe that if they tell the truth, people won't care enough.
Dead nine months early living in London? Frankly I'd rather be dead sooner if I had to live there.
Comprehensiveboy Comprehensiveboy London is a great city.
Comprehensiveboy Comprehensiveboy
On the money. Well said.
Too right ! I would never live in that shit-hole clean air or dirty air.
We'll be stabbed to death long before then though...
Comprehensiveboy Comprehensiveboy: To which part of the County of Greater
London do you refer?
When you're an ideologue you cannot be reasoned with. No matter what evidence is shown to you it's critical not to give an inch no matter how absurd your claims. This works if you're head of Greempeace, a Remain advocate or supporting multiculturalism.
Edward Kirkhope
Does it apply to your ideologies?
@@jongreenaway6025 yes because facts don't care about your feelings you fool...
nick goodman I was just making the point that he picked out three examples of what I suppose would be termed progressive political positions, when in the current polarised climate
nick goodman ...I would’ve thought pointing out that entrenched ideology on either side of political discourse is equally problematic.
nick goodman I suppose if I’m honest, what I’m also saying is that I suspect him (and probably you) to be part of the problem - i.e. people utterly wrapped up in their own opinions, which they have a complete inability and unwillingness to examine.
Not that I’m saying I necessarily disagree with your opinions.
Anyway maybe I’m wrong - like I say, it’s just my suspicion.
This guy is nuts, however, as a rural guy I am always amazed how dirty my clothes get after a day walking around London compared to my small town. That can't be great on your lungs.
Jeez you have no idea how it was in he fifties......you couldnt see across the road...
Stephen Vince the fact that it was worse back in the day doesn’t make it healthy today.
@@sjoperdje This, very flawed logic employed in the video and comments. It's falling so it must be fine!....
"Stephen Vince8 months ago
Jeez you have no idea how it was in he fifties......you couldn`t see across the road..."
Yep I believe you, an old friend was a lorry driver back then and got lost on one of his regular trips to London. Had to stop to ask a copper for directions as air pollution was so bad he couldn`t see 15ft in front of him. He said the air stank. Took a little something so he didn`t fall asleep on his long journeys.
@@rattusnorvegicus4380 Every house had at least 1 coal fire back then, terraced houses 3 or 4, and cars were minuscule in number compared to today. Houses caused smog back then, not transportation.
What about the dust off crisps..when you open a bag..you breath it in..it's a real worry for me and my extended family
Greenpeace seem to be aiming for an unrealistic target of 0 emissions- impossible. but they seem happy for us to pay environmental taxes because we don't reach it.
Cycle lanes were introduced in London recently at enormous expense, taking away road space from vehicles, and now traffic is stuck in queues emitting lethal fumes into the atmosphere.
In the long-run cycle lanes will be good for the environment.
I remember the howls of protests surrounding the pedestrianisation of Trafalger Sq. (taxi drivers in particular) which In the short-term may have caused bottle necks of traffic but who would want to turn the clock black? Human beings are amazing , but very change resistant.
"Get rid of CO2"! It's essential to life! Essential to photosynthesis. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace left when it decided to "get rid of" chlorine - an element- essential to vast amounts of materials. Greenpeace exists to justify itself and its income.
Andrew Neil takes no prisoners :D
This guy's funding depends on him saying things are getting worse. Reccomended: videos of Greenpeace co founder Patrick Moore who has some very surprising views.
Thank you for mentioning Patrick Moore! I was trying to remember his name. He has been erased from Greenpeace's history.
The 64 thousand dollar question is: If you get rid of diesel tomorrow, what will you use instead? It's nice to speak theoretically, but that doesn't solve the tough problems.
Exactly and the bottom line is all poor people will suffer
Emilio Jaconelli........the intention is in the future that poor people will not be allowed cars.......we will be made to work within 1 mile of our homes and will be paid with credits on a card or chip.........if you defy the govt then your credits/chip will be turned off until you comply.
@@geoffdundee thinking u have maybe taken that a bit far lol .
Emilio Jaconelli........if you do your research thats what you will come up with.
The U.K. is very lucky to have Andrew Neil. We have nothing like him in the U.S.. Everyone is a stooge for someone.
The founder of Greenpeace(Dr Patrick Moore) has stated repeatedly that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, it is in fact at one of the lowest levels in history at 400+ PPM and if it was to be reduced to less than 130PPM ALL LIFE ON EARTH WOULD CEASE!! pollution is not the same as greenhouse gases. This interviewee kept on about asthma in children in cities one thing his study did not cover was the quality of air inside vehicles. Most of these children will be driven to school and back and not allowed to play outside for FEAR of injury or abuse by overprotective parents, but actually putting them in more danger through lack of exercise that leads to obesity etc.!!
"Those graphs look flat to me" what??!!
Brilliant interview exposing the lies of the disgraced Greenpeace👊✅
A complete spoofer coming on with such a great interviewer👊
The tragic moment is. "We can argue facts all day but..."
This shoes that this person is ideologically possessed and doesn't want to get bogged down with what is true or not. He wants to concentrate on the moral propagander that makes him feel virtuous.
I think if you believe the air is as polluted as for example the 1980s you are deluding yourself.
Pollution levels have dropped hugely in 30 years and it's a great thing that it has.
See his shoulders slump when he was told to realise his claims were only a piece of propaganda. I enjoyed that I did.
"I don't support false claims", wait, most of his claims are false. 😁
Remember when it used to be about the hole in the ozone 15 years ago they dont mention it anymore
Acid rain anyone?
@@bigpete4227 Remember that bollocks lol!
“No I didn’t mean 40,000 deaths” “I meant 40,000 premature deaths” 😂
“No I didn’t mean it was equivalent to smoking 15 cigarettes a day” “I meant it was equivalent to passively smoking 10 cigarettes a day” 😂
Unusual to see one of these folk without their wooly hats out and about in rubber dinghies ramming oil tankers.
They're
Scared as its getting better means they have nothing to whinge about!
Nerds!
This is the new left: green on the outside, red in the inside.
Watermelon politics
@@brumav9779 Yep. Except...it tastes much worse.....
Asthma is much higher today than it was in the 70s despite the pollution going down!
I remember when every one had a coal fire, every town had a coal fired power station and the town was covered in a blue haze but asthma was very rare. I think we need to look elsewhere for the cause, namely food preservates and additives. Also any one remember acid rain which they said was dooming us? Not a whisper now!
Hugo Lindum asthma can also be brought on by parents using detergents and spray cleaners in homes, so kids can’t build up an immune system, and the chemicals in cleaning products affect the lungs..........worth considering eh?
@@ianlegg9765 ; I agree with you. I am an asthma sufferer and the severity of it has changed as I changed my lifestyle. During the late 80's and early 90's I came close to death during a few attacks and lost long periods at work because of it. Today I don't even have an inhaler and it's not a problem.
The difference, I believe, is my lifestyle and the food I'm eating. I've lived in big cities, in the countryside, by the sea, in the hills and none of it seemed to have an effect on it. In fact, I lived in a rural area, 40 Km from the nearest city, when it was at it's worst. Now I live in a large town, close to an industrial area and two major roads and I've no problems.
Hi, I think we're on to something re adatives and preservates. I think the horrifying increase in childhood cancer is also caused by these. I know a florist who provides flowers to the RVI childrens cancer unit Newcastle (deceased )and she says the numbers are horrifying.
On the same theme we have recently put 3 of our house cats to sleep through cancer. (Liver×2 ,throat )No they didn’t drink or passive smoke. The common denominator was eating 100. % processed food! .
@@ianlegg9765 ; Stress also plays a role. Children today don't play like we used to and are expected to conform in a way that is unnatural; especially young boys, while girls are expected to be more masculine and work in areas they wouldn't choose naturally.
The stress that the changes society bring are often felt from a very young age, for example, young boys are not allowed take part in the rough and tumble games of old while still in kindergarten. Self expression is limited while conformity is demanded. Children feel the pressure of this and it effects their physical, as well as their mental well being.
The biggest change in my lifestyle is the level of stress I have and I attribute most of my improvement to that.
Green peace
Using a petrol powered motor to fly a green peace banner over Donald Trumps Scotland golf course 😂😂🙈🙈🙈🙈
Diesel was encouraged because it was claimed to be cleaner.
He is right on one thing though: air pollution is still too high and does effect peoples health.
It does and we need to do our best to reduce it in a rational manner.
We also have advances in the medical world all the time which keeps us all alive longer which massively outweighs the negative aspects of pollution.
The greater the pity that he undermines this message with his lies.
The people effect, GOOGLE Malthus.
Brilliant, I love this interview, Neil is relentless, the package prior to this interview was also very iluminating i wish that was on UA-cam as well.
Andrew Neil is an excellent interviewer. Does his homework and asks great questions. Legend. Greenpeace don't seem to let facts affect their case.
He is a master interviewer... and joining the new UK news station with Nigel Farage which is being launched by Rupert Murdoch :) More fantastic interview to come.
The Green Peace representative is thinking "Andrew Neil is making too much sense. Let me out-talk him and drown him out."
Diesels also include buses which the green loonies have been supporting for years.
Experts don't like being proven wrong.
It's fair to say that over time we have been cleaning up our act, and we need to continue to do so.
But only when suitable alternatives become available and we are not quite there yet.
These Politicians need to get out of London and get themselves a proper education ..
What puzzles me is the fact that there are thousands of gardens in the UK with enough ground to have a tree within it that do not but in their proposals they don't encourage home owners or expect home owners not to have one or more!
this andrew neil deserves a knighthood, so brilliant at exposing these freaks
Gordon Brown is responsible for the popularity of Diesel when he lowered the BIK on Diesel company cars in the early noughties. In Europe, Diesel is king.
This man doesn't listen to Andrew's questions.
The director of Greenpeace earns 90k per year, wow unbelievable,a wage most of us can only dream of. Give us a vote on paying for climate change that we are still waiting for the last 60 years to happen,.
When the talk gets rough... try the old chestnut of the children are suffering... 🤔
Panic attack lol I’ve just inhaled burnt toast . I’m going to die. Tree hugging sandal wearers.
Note how when confronted with facts he suddenly changes from IS to COULD BE causing.......... Often when you read the actual research that these guys use to support their cause the research doesn't actually say what they claim.
What I can't get my head around is with air quality being vastly better nowadays than it was in the 60's and 70's when I was growing up; why is there so much more asthma diagnosed now? It can't be air polution levels, as air pollution is far less than it was in my youth.
Andrew Neil willbe missed the BBC are getting rid because he asks hard question of ALL
I went to a meeting with my council recently. Levels of NOx have gone down over the last few years. They are below the recommended danger levels. When I asked the reasons they said likely down to newer fleets (I think that means new cars). There was a problem around the time of the Volkswagen scandal but things are still improving.
Can an interview with Greenpeace be a carcrash? more a solar-powered golf cart crash.
I work/drive in and around London. It's very rare to come across a car/van that is chugging out noticable fumes. I very much doubt that was the case 20 years ago.
All they do is talk about eco issues but never actually do anything. I plant apple seeds in pots and plant them on common land near me. I’ve also done the same with sycamore shoots, ash and oak.
I’ve planted 9 saplings so far in the last year and have 24 growing in pots in my garden in my small terrace house garden.
That’s actual doing something! Not much I admit but it is actually something.
Flying around the world and scolding people does absolutely nothing.
I laughed as soon as he said “world health organisation “.
The key question is if the levels of PM10's and PM2.5'S were so high before and much lower now should we not be seeing a significant reduction in respiratory effects in modern children over that of children of the 1970's??????? or are we once again barking up the wrong tree?????
Because outlawing cars entering cities was always going to end up making pollution worse as people used filthier taxis/buses/diesel transport.
When I was growing up in the early 60's the smog in london was so thick you could not see more than 6 feet in front of you.
But I am still alive, only just, but still alive.
feeding the fearfactor
The fact the debate is between 2 people who grew up when air pollution was much worse kills the debate stone dead
My diesel engine was far more efficient than my current petrol one
'CHILD ABUSE'! The tactic of failed 'politicians' and 'charity' operatives down the decades, when they are losing an argument. Bring the "little children" into it, as though the "far right" doesn't care for "little children", and so we win the argument by default! WHAT CRAP! Simple 'child abuse'!
Modern diesel cars are much cleaner than petrol ones.
What is the difference between a death and a premature death in the context of air quality?
I get effed off with him and politicians who keep on saying I think, I think, I think. I much prefer these people to say I know and not I think.
Like so many campaigners who make claims he twists the facts to suit his case, ignores facts and speaks at pressure in order to overwhelm the interrogator.
Must be great going around telling everyone they are dirty and their dirt is killing other people.
“We can argue about the facts”
You can’t argue with facts 😂
Neil himself is a breath of fresh air.
It will be many years before diesel hgv and delivery vehicles can be swapped out. But diesel cars can be fased out. Look to more economic petrol cars. Or synthetic fuels.
Rename him The Exaggerater
So if Diesels are so bad, how come Asthma and other diseases have massively increased, even though levels of air pollution have been dropping hugely since the 70's? When I grew up in the 70's and 80's I didn't know anyone with asthma. Now everyone's got asthma or ADHD or Dyslexia or Autism etc etc etc. I drive a Diesel van and another for work. My own van runs on veg oil, which is 60% less polluting than Diesel, so why isn't Government encouraging alternative fuels alongside other measures? While we're at it, why aren't these hundreds of thousands of new houses that are going up all over the country, carbon neutral? Why aren't they fitted with air source heating and solar panels if the Government is so 'right on' about saving the planet? Agenda's and lies. Just like the General election.
This man is defending scaremongering lies.
Not the sort of person to trust !
An electronic or solar powered car crash rather than a diesel one.
He should stick to growing GREEN BEANS the greens party drive every where. Flying to.
Largest producer of CO2? Mammals breathing out.
yeah lets do away with diesel cars, vans, lorries, busses, trains, oh and ships too. Mmmmm this will make a huge difference. No goods or foods in the shops, no work, no incomes ....... mmmmm yeah lets do this then since air pollution levels are reducing. They have known about pm10 for 25 years and have done nothing about it, so why now, other than it is during a tory government !!!!!
Mel Royale There are always alternatives, if we can put in the brain power to make something as sophisticated as diesel engines then we can do the same for alternatives.
yes but my point is our daily lifestyle depends on diesel motors. And the numbers supposed to die from diesel fumes is well misleading. No one wants air pollution. But it is the case that people "use" diesel motors to sustain their lifestyles, then complain about the air pollution such lifestyles produce, as if its nowt to do with the individual. You are correct in that the hydrogen fuel cell will be fantstic. But it depends on when we are allowed to have them.
Mel Royale our lifestyle does depend on diesel motors and that needs to change. It's that simple, I don't care about people complaining about the environment who are also using diesel, they're also the problem. phase out diesel over a period of time it's not rocket science
so how are your ideas progressng into action. what engine have you built that does not pollute the environment
Mel Royale Hydrogen as you said would be perfect but a more realistic idea would be electric that is already being used today. unfortunately it's gotten to the point where we're going to have to sacrifice things like our economy and our imported goods for the sake of the planet. it's easy to say "but we need a strong economy, we need ships and airplanes" but if you carry on with fossil fuels you'll have another 200 or so years left and then bam, no ships, no economy, no nothing. If we had acted a couple of decades ago we could have ensured a smooth transition from fossil to renewable but it's too late now. it will be abrupt and difficult to change, but it is absolutely necessary for our long time survival.
The Australian High Commissioner at the time Alexander Downer had years earlier signed a controversial agreement with the government of East Timor for mining of gas and oil reserves in the Timor Gap. Strange he didn't mention it.
I thought greenpeace were not meant to be liars like all the rest
Hate to break it to you but they've been lying and spreading fear since the 70s.
"Why I left Greenpeace"
ua-cam.com/video/BpBnJq19R60/v-deo.html
*Air Pollution is on account of living on a 'windy island' soon dispersed and thinned out to negligible levels. It's those warm summer nights when the wind in the wrong direction I get a distinctly foul whiff from the Sewage Works just over 1 mile away.*
He keeps sayin “I think”.
Not a good look
A real question here, what type of fuel do their big ships use when they sail around the world ? I'd honestly would like to know
Heavy fuel oil, which is like diesel but worse.
@@andyhowlett2231 And there are.....wait for it. 300`000 of these massive mega-container ships on our oceans at any one time!
when you look at the distribution of children with breathing problems, with the distribution of any air pollution, there is little if no actual relationship. Diesel does not kill 100,000 people each year. It is known that some people are susceptible to air pollution, which can come from all vehicles, together with fumes from our home, including carbon monoxide from central heating. Singling diesel cars is wholly inaccurate
Diesel AND petrol are produced when refining oil. What does he propose, we pour the diesel back into the ground and keep the petrol?
Andrew Neil is a legend. Great video 👍
You'd never be able to do this kind of interview now.
Andrew is a great interviewer no doubt. I just feel that he knew exactly where he wanted this to go and was just a little to eager to get there. If someone is wrong let them finish as they will still be wrong but let them argue against themselves. Better to let someone speak with confidence and belief in what they are saying and then counter with facts, this will have a greater reaction and they will have less reason to dismiss you. The other guy maybe wrong but at least he is doing what he thinks is right to fix the problem. Are we?
If you asked the guy should we then switch from using diesel cars to petrol he would say no. Switching to petrol, same articulates from modern direct injection petrol engines as diesel, would dramatically increase Co2 emissions. If you care o look at the official environmental website you will find that one of the biggest sources of Nox is burning natural gas. The truth is that Greenpeace wants us yo use no energy whatsoever excepting their delegates travelling by air to exotic destinations to stay in five star hotels at our expense whilst telling us he to live our lives. Anyone old enough to to remember what London air quality was like pre 1960's laughs about claims that London's air is now poor.
Can we get any truth from anyone these days Andrew is correct lying ruins your credibility 😡
You go before Andrew Neil.......you get verbally mugged and then you're had for dessert!!
that guy looks like he's taken too many drugs, been too hedonistic, can't see logic and can barely hold his thoughts together now.
I would be interested to see if there was an increase in the amount of emission sources . If the amount of cars etc have gone up over the last decade but the amount of emissions has remained the same, it's still positive