Oct 22, 2026 · 1 hr 5 min · 13 segments
Send us Fan Mail We argue that public safety and crime policy should be non-partisan, and we explain why voters are rejecting “soft on crime”…
I said, okay, so you only push this.
Fine.
Do you have any proposals to solve your, especially climate change?
How many times the world's going
blown up 20 times already.
Don't get me wrong.
I'm for clean air and all that.
I like that.
But how are you going to achieve that practically? Do you have scientific methods that can improve clean air? And also when you
look at their proposals and you say you're proposing that we're going to spend trillions of dollars to make no measurable impact on climate change because the number one factor that is affecting climate change is the sun.
And so, but, you know, I've had activists say, well, if we could just reduce the heat by, you know, one-tenth of a percent, why wouldn't we do that? I'm like, because there's a cost-benefit analysis.
So we're going to do that, so we're still going to get to the same point in 2 billion years, and we're going to reduce it by 0.1 of the temperature at great cost and harm to our governments, to our economies, to the world economies.
And you know what they know it is that that money is just for, you know, their programs and for their kickbacks.
Let's get all this money for all these purposes, and then they'll do with it what they want.
Yeah.
I said, okay, so you only push this.
Fine.
Do you have any proposals to solve your, especially climate change?
How many times the world's going
blown up 20 times already.
Don't get me wrong.
I'm for clean air and all that.
I like that.
But how are you going to achieve that practically? Do you have scientific methods that can improve clean air? And also when you
look at their proposals and you say you're proposing that we're going to spend trillions of dollars to make no measurable impact on climate change because the number one factor that is affecting climate change is the sun.
And so, but, you know, I've had activists say, well, if we could just reduce the heat by, you know, one-tenth of a percent, why wouldn't we do that? I'm like, because there's a cost-benefit analysis.
So we're going to do that, so we're still going to get to the same point in 2 billion years, and we're going to reduce it by 0.1 of the temperature at great cost and harm to our governments, to our economies, to the world economies.
And you know what they know it is that that money is just for, you know, their programs and for their kickbacks.
Let's get all this money for all these purposes, and then they'll do with it what they want.
Yeah.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.