exist anymore, and that is because it was beatable. there was only one legal manufacturer of the pills. and so at a policy level we banned the legal sale of the drug and made sure that one manufacturer complied. in terms of the illegal sales, we convinced or bought off those four factories who made that complicated base level chemical compound. we convinced them or bought them off so that they should stop selling it in bulk. and so the u.s. has no quaalude problem anymore. whatever you think about the drug war, i wanted to raise this story this morning, because as a non-scientist, i m here to tell you that the general public in the united states thinks that the whole idea of human effort to combat climate change is futile, that the whole idea of environmental science is the
time tonight. nice to have you here. thank you for the invitation. first let me ask, especially as a non-scientist, if i screwed any of that up explaining how you got to this the position you just detailed in the times. it was accurate except for the karblthization of the koch foundation that always gave us a completely open hand and indicated no preference for what our results would show. fair and smart of you to point out, and i appreciate you doing that. i do i did try to insist that there was no implications there was any funding, no strings attached to the funding, but i think as was noted in the nbc nightly news report as well, the fact that they were among your funders is part of the reason why, i think, your position on this, your evolution on this, has received so much attention. do you see why people might put that sort of political shine on what it is you have done? well, we try very hard to be objective and nonpolitical. we re hoping that by doing so and stick
his new book is called energy for future presidents. thank you very much for your time tonight. nice to have you here. thank you for the invitation. first let me ask, especially as a non-scientist, if i screwed any of that up explaining how you got to this the position you just detailed in the times. i think it was accurate except for the characterization of the koch foundation that always gave us a completely open hand and indicated no preference for what our results would show. fair and smart of you to point out, and i appreciate you doing that. i do i did try to insist that there was no implications there was any funding, no strings attached to the funding, but i think as was noted in the nbc nightly news report as well, the fact that they were among your funders is part of the reason why, i think, your position on this, your evolution on this, has received so much attention. do you see why people might put that sort of political shine on what it is you have done? we
despite the aftershocks, despite the snow, they pass the children from person to person across the tops of shipping containers. still ahead, american nuclear experts believe there are fuel rods completely exposed in one of the japanese reactors. japanese officials seem to disagree. who should we believe? the japanese people are asking the same question. former state department spokesman jamie rubin joins me, coming up. and non-scientist bill o reilly says you should not believe the press when it comes to reports on the dangers from those japanese nuclear reactors. this is the same non-scientist