HS 417 FBF - An Inconsistent Truth with Phil Valentine

Welcome to this week's edition of Flashback Friday.

Your opportunity to get some good review.

By listening to episodes from the past that Jason has hand picked to help.

You today in the present and propel you into the future. Enjoy.

Welcome to the Holistic Survival show with Jason Hartman. The economic storm brewing around the world is set to spill into all aspects of our lives. Are you prepared? Where are you going to turn for the critical life skills necessary to survive and prosper? The Holistic Holistic Survival show is your family's insurance for a better life. Jason will teach you to think independently, to understand threats and how to create the ultimate action plan. Sudden change or worst case scenario, you'll be ready. Welcome to Holistic Survival, your key resource for protecting the people, places and profits you care about in uncertain times. Ladies and gentlemen, your host, Jason Hartman.

Welcome to the Holistic Survival Show. This is your host, Jason Hartman, where we talk about protecting the people, places and profits you care about in these uncertain times. We have a great interview for you today and we will be back with that in less than 60 seconds on the Holistic Survival Show. And by the way, be sure to visit our website@holisticsurvival.com you can subscribe to. Our blog, which is totally free, has loads of great information and there's just a lot of good content for you on the site. So make sure you take advantage of that@holisticsurvival.com we'll be right back.

What's great about the shows you'll find on jasonhartman.com is that if you want to learn how to finance your next big real estate deal, there's a show for that. If you want to learn more about food storage and the best way to keep those onions from smelling up everything else, there's a show for that. If you honestly want to know more about business ethics, there's a show for that. And if you just want to get away from it all and need to know something about world travel, there's even a show for that. Yep, there's a show for just about anything only from jasonhartman.com or type in Jason Hartman in the iTunes store.

It's my pleasure to welcome Phil Valentine to the show. He is a nationally syndicated radio talk show host and the award winning creator of An Inconsistent Truth. He's also an author and newspaper columnist. You can probably tell by the title because it rings a bell and harkens back to An Inconvenient Truth, which I'm not sure how much truth there is in that inconvenient Truth. But we'll discuss and debate that here now. Phil, welcome. How are you?

I'm fine. Jason, how are you?

Good, good. And it's good to have you. You're coming to us from Nashville, Tennessee, today, right?

I am. Music City, usa. Absolutely.

Great town, great place. So, hey, in Inconsistent Truth, this has been debated and debated and debated, and there are so many layers to this issue of climate change, global warming. I've. But we've certainly all noticed how they changed the name of it actually from global warming to climate change, when I guess the warming wasn't really happening. Where do you want to start with this whole topic? I've got lots of questions for you.

Well, first of all, there's a huge myth out there that CO2 is a pollutant. And I think that that's where we start. I mean, they try to convince us that we're polluting the world with CO2. And CO2 is not a pollutant. It's what we take in, or what plants take in. It's what we exhale with every breath. And it's a ridiculous notion to think that something as simple as CO2 that we use is used every day, and every day photosynthesis was plant would be a pollutant. But in order to get people to rally around this cry of banning it or trying to do something about it, they have to vilify it. And Al Gore's done a masterful job of shortening carbon dioxide to just carbon to make it sound like it's some sinister, ugly, dirty thing. When I think of carbon, I think like a lump of coal or something. So he's done a masterful job at that. He's also done a great job at melding carbon dioxide and smog. A lot of people don't know that smog has sulfur dioxide and ground level ozone, all sorts of things, but it does not contain CO2. So people believe that they're actually cleaning up the planet by doing something about CO2, when CO2 is odorless, colorless, and actually beneficial to the planet.

Yeah, well, you know, I was going to say as soon as you said that, the plants sure seem to like it. And how can an environmentalist say plants are bad or anything that plants like would be bad aren't? I mean, you know, the whole concept of being a tree hugger. Well, what do trees breathe? They breathe CO2.

But you see, you see people that run greenhouses, they pump CO2 into their greenhouses about two to three times the atmospheric level because they know that CO2 is a great thing for their plants. They grow faster, hardier, bigger. So we need CO2. As a matter of fact, if we had more CO2 on the planet, we would all be better off. But they want you to believe that CO2 as harmful as causing global warming, when in fact there is absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever. Now we have the 73 climate models they've been using for the last 30 years that have now been all, every one of them debunked over the last 10 to 15 years. The temperatures have been flat and every one of the climate models was wrong. It had us at 2 or 3 degrees warmer than we are now. So at some point people have to start to realize that they've been bamboozled.

Yeah. And you know, Phil, I mean, this just naturally, this logic just naturally has to lead to a terrifying conclusion, and that is that people are bad and people exhale. And so the best way to reduce the CO2 levels is to ban people, isn't it?

Well, that's basically what they've said. I mean, at the heart of the global warming issue and the movement is a ban or doing something about the population. They say this all the time. Al Gore has even said this. I'm not saying that everybody who recycles is trying to kill off people, but they do think that people are a virus on the planet and we've got too many people do something about it. I would say if they want to do something, they start with themselves.

That's exactly what I would, you know, like, wouldn't a real environmentalist just believe in suicide?

Exactly. Just jump off the cliff and save the planet.

Yeah. Then so it's one less person exhaling CO2. When I first heard about the whole global warming debate, I was ignorant of it and now I'm fairly educated about it. But back in the. When I first heard about it, I thought that they were talking about carbon monoxide, what comes out of your exhaust pipe of your car. And that seemed like a logical argument to me. I mean, certainly, you know, we all want less pollution. Right, but, but I mean, why don't they attack carbon monoxide? I mean, that's sort of an obvious one. It seems like it would be hard to argue with. Right.

Well, because we've already. That's the whole point. We got catalytic converters and smokestack scrubbers that have. We have the technology that have turned carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide. If you want a perfectly combust engine, all you're going to get is carbon dioxide. It is what you're Looking for, if you're looking for turning something that was bad into something good. So that's where all the science has been with the catalytic converters and everything else to turn all the noxious stuff into carbon dioxide. So now that's the end result. So they figure, well, this is the end result, this is something we can tax, we can make money off of it. And basically that's what it boils down to. It's all about making money. And they're making a ton of it.

Right? And when they are making money in this type of money making scheme, it means it enslaves another party. It has to take that money from someone else. This is not capitalism in its true sense by any means, because it doesn't add value to anybody else.

It's not a fair exchange of value. If I want to buy something from you, Phil, I will gladly give you my money, happily do it, because I get something that to me is of greater value and that's a free market and that's valuable. But they're making money in a way that is not a free market. I mean, it's slavery, basically.

Yeah, well, what they're basically doing is they're trying to transfer wealth from the producers to the non producers. And that would be either from individuals or companies or, or countries. Anybody or anything that is producing, they want to take away. Because the end product of a productive, whatever it is, whether it's a company or whether it's a country, is going to be CO2. Because when you're expending energy, that's what it is. So the countries that don't emit a lot of CO2 aren't really producing a whole lot by definition. So if you can take the money from the producer nations and give it to the non producer nations, you found a clever way of redistributing the wealth without anybody really knowing what it is and what they want to do. In the movie we look at not only the science, but then we look at the scientists behind it. We have one scientist, Dr. John Christie, who is actually a lead author of the ipcc, which is what these guys point to as unanimous. He certainly doesn't believe in all this, but we wanted to go beyond that and look at the culture of what drives these people to believe in all this. Despite the evidence out there, despite you and me knowing that CO2 is non pollutant, they believe it with every fiber of their being and that's their reason why. So we explore that and we find that it's all about guilt and People wanting to matter, people want to have an impact. To think that their life wasn't in vain. They had something they could look back on at the end of their life. And oh yes, I made a difference in this life. And so if you can make them feel guilty about polluting the planet, so called polluting the planet, and then give them a way to do something about it, oh man, that's just perfect. These folks then have, have a purpose in life and they can, they can die happy. So it's one of those basic things in life. I mean, you people looking for a purpose. And these folks like Al Gore have managed to tap into that and exploit it.

I agree with that. You know, people will join a cause just to be part of a cause without much thinking about it. It's, it's like Eric Hoffer's old book, the True Believer. It's just, you know, it's just like this blind. It's the sheeple, right? It's the sheeple.

That's exactly right.

So I guess the first, you know, I want to back way up on this whole issue and ask a very fundamental question here. And my, my very fundamental let's back way up question. Let's not talk about whether global warming is even true or false or whether, you know, whether it's happening or not or who's causing it or how it's happening, if it is. But the first question I think that has to be asked, Phil, is one that I'm sure you've asked is is it, assuming it is true, is it even bad in the first place? Let's, let's give them that it's happening. Yeah, well, no.

Global warming.

Say, say that the Earth is warming. Say that they. And it's happening. Say the Earth is warming. You know, forget about the cause. It's just happening however it is. Is it bad? I mean, isn't that the first question we have to ask?

Yeah, and we actually have scientists that ask that in the qu. In the movie. And they say, of course not. Of course it's not bad. We look at the Medieval Warm Period. The Medieval Warm Period, without boring your listeners too much, ran from about 900 A.D. to about 1300 to 1350 A.D. and during the Medieval Warm Period, that's when the Vikings populated Greenland. They didn't name Greenland. That is a joke. The southern part of Greenland was very green. And the Medieval Warm period is about 3 1/2 to 4 degrees warmer than it is now. That's when in Europe all the cathedrals were built and life was Good. It was in the Little Ice Age that followed the Medieval Warm Period and that ran from 1350 to 1850 that we saw all sorts of disease and plagues and things like this. And the Vikings were killed off in Greenland because of the ice. So yes, absolutely, warming is better. There's nothing to be afraid of even if it's happening.

I mean, there are people starving around the world. If warming is occurring, I mean, doesn't it make more land arable to where it can be farmed and produce food?

Sure, sure. And far more people are killed by the cold than they are by the warmth. So I think, to me, if you're wanting to help people out, which I'm a big believer in helping people out, especially in these third world countries. In part of the movie, we went to Kenya and we looked at what was going on over there and trying to get these people the electricity they need and people literally dying every day because they don't have enough electricity. They don't have enough ways to keep themselves alive. And these people say, well, you don't need to develop, you need to just stay just like you are. They have a right to develop just like we had a right to develop. And to deny them that right, which is what's going on with a lot of these countries is standing in the way of any kind of energy development. They're giving them a death sentence. And I think that's on purpose.

Yeah, well, so let's talk about some of the poverty it creates for already disadvantaged poor people. I mean, it makes the prices of everything rise. It, it makes the cost of supplies and medicine increase. Delve into that a bit, will you?

Well, yeah, I mean, anytime you're going to put a tax on something, you're going to increase the price of it. That's just a given. And people understand this when they see the energy prices go up. We're looking at what's going now with the war on coal, with this administration, with the Obama administration, where they have shut down a record number of coal plants and they intend to shut down as many as they can before they're out of office. When they do this knowing that we get 40 to 50% of our power from coal, there has to be something there to replace it or you're going to have to have rolling blackouts or just long term blackouts, they don't seem to care about that. Not only we have the blackouts, but it's a supply and demand society. We're in a capitalist society, which is the best society on earth. This is how things prosper. But it also drives prices up. When there's less supply or more demand, less supply, you're going to see prices go through the roof. So yes, the people who are disproportionately affected by higher prices are certainly the poor folks out there. The very people that these people purport to want to protect, help, are the ones who are going to have trouble being able to keep the lights on if in fact there is electricity after.

They get through the country, even offshore. When we look at, I remember seeing one piece about this and that was an African village that very disadvantaged, I mean, needing medicine, needing all kinds of stuff. They needed to keep a refrigerator running, to keep certain medicines cold. And this movement, this global warming movement, as fictitious as it may be, made it very difficult to do that. And I mean, just in amazing ways. It's so pervasive it impacts everybody around the planet. I don't remember the specifics about that story, but pretty amazing.

Oh well, it is. And that's the problem is anything and everything that they plan to do to mitigate or to solve this problem is going to hurt the poor disproportionately because they're the ones who are going to have to ultimately pay. They say, well, we're going to sock it to the oil companies. Well, it's like the price of doing business. I try to get people to understand this about taxes. If you tax, for one thing, if you've got rid of the corporate tax, which is a different discussion. But if you got rid of the corporate tax and people go, oh, but the corporations should be paying taxes. I know if corporations don't pay taxes, it's a pass through. It's a pass through to the consumer. If we were to eliminate the corporate tax now, the money that they don't have to pay in corporate tax, they would lower the price to be more competitive and all of them would follow suit. So conversely, if you add a tax to something or add a fee or a carbon whatever, it's going to drive the price up. They're naturally going to charge more for it. Businesses look at the cost of doing business, whether it's labor or the cost of the product they're selling, the cost of getting it to the market and all of that, then they factor in a profit margin and that's where the price is. Divide that by the number of products and that's where the price is. The more you add to that equation, the higher the price is going to be and the more it's going to disrupt disproportionately affect the poor, especially when it comes to energy.

Yeah, I've always said that, that corporations are nothing more than pass through entities. So if you, if you restrict them, if you make it more expensive by raising the minimum wage, by lopping all sorts of OSHA regulations on them, by lopping all sorts of labor laws on them, all they will do is pass that price through to the consumer. And look, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure this out. Anybody can see that it's true. And you can, can see it in the international trade debate, which, you know, there are some fair questions here, but just conceptually we know it's true. Before the rise of China and before we started offshoring a lot of this production and manufacturing, it was more expensive to make things in America because America, of course has a lot more regulation and higher paid workers. And I'm not saying that's all bad. This is a complex issue for sure, but conceptually you can certainly see that it's true. And so now you can go to Walmart and you can fill up your house with very inexpensive stuff that's of rather high quality. Frankly, I don't know why people really bash these imports. I mean, I think they make great products. They make Apple products and everybody loves those. But now, you know, you have higher unemployment in the US So certainly it has its consequences, no question. But you can see that we've outsourced the pollution to China. We've outsourced the, the unions have lost their footing in large degree because of China. The labor laws, the complex, difficult labor and OSHA regulations here, we've just outsourced that to China and gotten rid of it and gotten around it. And so you love it as a consumer. And it makes it obvious that these are just pass through entities because they're competitive. If the regulations go down, one company will always step out of line and sell the product for less to gain an advantage on the other one. Then the other ones will have to follow as well and the prices will drop. If the regulation goes up, the burden goes up, the carbon tax goes up, they start to raise prices and the other ones have to follow to maintain their margins. It is just a simple fact of economics.

Yeah, and if we're at an economic disadvantage now, imagine if we had some kind of a carbon tax and they have to tack that on too. The problem with these folks is they don't understand nor do they appreciate or even like capitalism. And I think that's at the root of the problem here, a lot of these folks who are behind this movement, and again, I'm not saying that everybody out there who has fallen for it, because there are a lot of folks who just don't know any better. And that's part of what this film is about, is to get the word out so people can educate themselves. I understand falling prey to the news media and everything else going on. It's a hard thing to overcome. But the fact of the matter is the basic people behind all of this just don't like the capitalist system very much. They think it's unfair, they think it needs to be destroyed. And one sure fire way to destroy it is to destroy the engine inside of capitalism, which is energy. And if it can destroy energy, as Newt Gingrich said in our film, you destroy.

The oil industry, you destroy the people who are opposed to them. So that's what they're trying to do, right?

And then, and then you destroy people's lives. And so I would even go further than what you said. You said they don't like capitalism, I don't think they like people. And it's the logical conclusion. I mean, it's funny, they should almost be looking at history and revering these evil dictators who committed mass genocide. I mean, those people lowered the carbon footprint, right?

Well, it's funny you should mention that because we have in the movie where they were praising Genghis Khan for killing off a million people or 100 million, whatever it was.

They did a study on the carbon footprint, the environmental impact of Genghis Khan killing all those people off and how it helped the environment. And as I said in the movie, I guess Hitler would have gotten a green ribbon had it not been for those polluting ovens. So, I mean, yeah, they look at anybody that kills a bunch of folks off, they seem to think that's a great thing.

Oh, and environmental heroes, maybe they can give them a posthumous Nova Nobel Prize to Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao. Right. I mean, this is just, it's absurdity. I mean, Pol Pot should be their hero, right?

No kidding. But that's the way they operate and that's the way they think. And a lot of people don't realize that they are part of all this. By joining into this, this notion that we're destroying the planet, they, they are helping these people with their ultimate goal, which is to destroy capitalism and kill off a good amount of folks on the earth because they think that we're a virus.

Wow, that is one scary thing. There's an old saying about the Environmental movement. And that is green trees have red roots. Have you heard that one?

Yep. Yeah, I haven't, but I like it.

Yeah. Yeah. Red meaning communism.

Absolutely. And that's where a lot of people. One of our guys says, you know, we threw these people out the window. Red that came back through the front door, green. And that's exactly what it is. Yeah.

Boy, that's a scary thing. Well, what other elements of this debate or of this issue should we discuss, Phil?

Well, I think we need to discuss the myths that are out there, because that's what scares people. First of all, people say, oh, we're killing off the polar bears. Polar bears are thriving. The polar bear population since the 1980s has actually exploded. So there's no problem with the polar bears. They think that all the sea ice is melting, when actually we've had, as we do cyclically on the planet. The Arctic ice has been diminishing somewhat since we've had satellite readings since 1979. But we also knew the same thing was happening because of newspaper reports in the 1920s. And we have explorers that were up in the Arctic in the 1950s and a submarine bobbing up and down in the Arctic Ocean in March in an iceless sea. We also know that this year there's 60% more ice in the Arctic than there was a year ago. So it is a fluctuating, cyclical natural occurrence. And at the same time, nobody wants to stop at South Pole because the South Pole has actually been increasing at ice, and it's at record levels of ice. So if you add the two together, you come up at pretty much average for ice. There's not an ice problem. And on top of that, the ice in the Arctic is floating. So when it melts, it has nothing to do with sea levels. So the sea levels aren't rising, but they just try to freak everybody else out about that. Hurricanes are not getting more intense or more frequent. They're actually getting less so. So all of these things that the environmentalists have been able to hang their hat on, all these things are falling to pieces, and people are starting to realize it. What we want to do, this movie is give people who understand common sense and cover to come out of the closet, not be ashamed to say, look, this doesn't make. None of this alarmism makes sense. And we give them the ammunition to go forth and make their argument.

Well, Phil, one of the points about the ice melting issue that has just blown my mind. When you talk about sea ice, people believe this complete silliness. You know, you would think that they'd never had a glass of ice water before in their life. If you have a glass of ice water and you don't drink it and you let the ice melt, the glass does not overflow.

That's right. Well, they don't understand that.

They think because the ice melts, the oceans will rise.

That's right.

Now, of course, if the ice is on land and it melts and puts water into the ocean, that would be correct.

And that's the Antarctica, and we have record amounts of ice there. It's not melting, it's getting more plentiful. So you got to understand, it's the same amount of water on the planet. And if it's frozen in snow in Antarctica, there's less water out there to be in the ocean. So none of this makes sense that the sea levels are rising. There's just no, there's no argument to be made for it. But again, they don't care about logic. They don't care about anything other than whatever fits their agenda, whatever fits what it is they're trying to do. And that's just, to me, it is disingenuous when you got somebody like Al Gore with four or five houses, with a houseboat, flying around in a private jet, trying to tell us, the rest of us, that we're polluting too much and we need to lessen our carbon footprint.

Well, let's talk a little bit about the hypocrisy of Al Gore, who is the undisputed leader of this movement, who has become very, very wealthy by exploiting this, this, and, you know, and, and fear mongering. His electric bill is about 12 or $1,300 per month. That's probably 12 or 13 times the average American, I would assume, to heat and cool his big mansion. You look at Arianna Huffington, who came out with a statement years ago that people should stop driving SUVs because they consume too much energy. And, you know, she lives in an 8,800 square foot mansion. Well, that's one of her mansions. I'm sure she has more of them. But there's, there's no talk about the cost to heat and cool that and the energy it takes to maintain that and build it. First of all, just the materials and the environmental impact of building these things. I mean, I was, I was having this debate with one of my friends who's liberal and believes in global warming. And it was a very smart person, by the way. It was kind of shocking that he, he would believe in this. And he says Jason, come on. Al Gore is a, you know, a world famous person. He's not going to live in a shack. That's unreasonable.

That's right. But he doesn't have to live in a 10,000 square foot house. We actually, in the movie, we go over his, his, his electricity bills. He started off using 20 times the power of the average Nashville house. So he decided to green his home. He put in geothermals for the thing. So now he's only 10%, 10 times higher than the average Nashville house. Whoopi do. And when he did that, he got some kind of a green award from some organization for being environmentally friendly. It's just ridiculous.

This is mind boggling. I mean, there is, there's almost no, there's like no legitimate attempt even to not be a hypocrite. If I were, if I were Al Gore, I would be worried about that criticism. You know, I wouldn't want people calling me a hypocrite. I would try to abide by the stuff I'm preaching. I mean, there's just, no, there's not even really any attempt.

Well, but nobody calls him on it. See, that's except for people like you and me. He doesn't care about us, the people that follow him, the people who are obsessed with him. He is essentially the prophet of this cult. Not one person in this, in this cult is calling him on it. They like your friend. They make excuses for Al Gore. Well, he's an important guy. Well, Ed Begley Jr. Is a very famous guy, a very famous actor. And he lives in a very small house, recycles everything, drives electric cars. He's actually living the life. There's no reason why if you're famous, you have to live in five different houses.

Yeah, I mean, Al Gore doesn't drive a Prius. Is that what you're saying, Phil?

Well, he does have one, but Pipper, when they were together, she also had a muscle car that they would ride around the neighborhood in. And actually we heard this from a very good source. Al would scrunch down in the passenger seat so nobody would see him as he drove around in this muscle car.

Funny. Unbelievable. You know, it has always been amazing to me how people on the left are willing to tolerate these double standards by their elites. It's like, it's like under communism you had this, like, elite class. And all of the little people, the hoi polloi, were just supposed to eke out a living and follow the dictates of their great leaders. And the elite class who live in luxury and take, take, take from the rest. I mean it's amazing. Like I just don't know how people in a society where you have a, I don't want to say a free press, but a semi free press, we certainly know from the Obama AP scandal recently here. And you know how Obama, like Nixon, I mean, I'll give you one side on the right and one on the left keeps an enemies list and uses the government to keep tabs on these people. Now, now everybody is under the thumb of the NSA obviously, but how do they explain that? How do, why do they tolerate that? Like my friend saying, oh, he's a world class guy, you know, he's an important person of, he's not going to live in a shack. Well, he lives like a king. I mean this is like a kingdom.

Well, I'll tell you why. Because liberals, I have found out through my many years of studying this species, they think with their emotions and conservatives think with logic. So even the most intelligent people, like your friend, who's obviously a smart guy, but when it comes to political issues or social issues, he puts his logical mind in neutral and goes to his emotional mind for answers because he wants to feel like he, well, he just wants to feel, he wants to feel like he's caring and cares about folks. And I would submit to you that conservatism is the most caring way to look after folks because it makes people insist that people be self sufficient. We've got two kids in college and my wife and I were talking about this. We went to see him this weekend and it was a great visit but it was sort of like, you know, okay, it's time for you guys to come, you know, sort of rushing us out. And she says, you know, I was, she said I was watching some psychological reading something and they said you need to be able to judge how well you've done as a parent by how independent your children turn out to be. And so I, you know, we were both taking that as sort of a compliment. Not that we have been bad parents and they don't want to see us anymore, but now they've gotten to a point where they're independent and they want to live their lives. That's what we should want for everybody in America is independence and you want to live your own life. You wouldn't do this to your worst enemies, put them on all this welfare and make them dependent. But a lot of these people don't understand the difference and they think all these people are just too stupid to take care of themselves. But when you get these people, like your friend, he wants to feel like he's caring about somebody. So the way to care about somebody is to take care of them. And so he lets his emotions kick in and he throws logic out the window. Logically, when you think about global warming and the issue and CO2 being a pollutant, logically, that you can't make that work, but emotionally, oh, it just tugs at you that we're destroying the planet, so we got to be able to do something about it. And that's, that's. I think that's the problem. People are thinking too much with emotions.

Yeah, well, that's a, that's a good point, Phil. Give out your website. Tell people where they can see the film.

You can go to. Well, actually, you can get it on Amazon.com if they prefer to do that, or you can go to An Inconsistent Truth Calm. That's the website for the movie. You can see the scientists that we have and links to their credentials and things like this and some other things, you know, some YouTube videos about the movie and you can order from there, too. But if you'd like to go straight to Amazon.com, that'd be fine, too.

Fantastic. Well, what else would you like people to know about this?

Well, I think what we want people to know about this and what people take away from this is there is no consensus. I mean, people have been bullied into believing that there's a consensus and that there's only one side to it. Once people see this movie, which, by the way, is fairly entertaining, it's got some light moments in it, it's got some, some funny stuff in it. So I think people enjoy it. But once you walk away from watching this movie, you're saying there's no way there's a consensus. This issue is wide open. And that's what we want to do, is we want to keep the dialogue open. The best thing for people when it comes to any issue is to be able to evaluate both sides. They want to cut off our side because they know when people see it, they're going to believe it.

Yeah, well, that's a very, very good point. Well, Phil Valentine, thank you so much for joining us today. And keep, keep getting the word out there and telling people more about the inconsistent truth, or actually, I should say the proper title, an Inconsistent Truth. And this is important stuff to know, regardless of which side you fall on. Now, you should know both sides of the debate. Obviously, that's the only, the only reasonable way is to hear both sides of it. So, Phil Valentine, thanks for joining us today.

Well, thanks very much for having me.

Thank you for joining us today for the Holistic Survival show protecting the People, places and profits you care about in uncertain times. Be sure to listen to our Creating wealth show, which focuses on exploiting the financial and wealth creation opportunities in today's economy. Learn more at www.jasonhartman.com or search Jason Hartman on itunes. This show is produced by the Hartman Media Company, offering very general guidelines and information. Opinions of guests are their own and none of the content should be considered individual advice. If you require personalized advice, please consult an appropriate professional information deemed reliable but not guaranteed.