Science Matters & Debate Coach on Presidential Debates

Science Matters & Debate Coach on Presidential Debates


♪♪>>Ted: COMING UP NEXT ON “ARIZONA HORIZON” — WHAT MAKES FOR A GOOD DEBATE AND A GOOD DEBATER? WE SPEAK WITH AN AWARD-WINNING DEBATE COACH. AND PHYSICIST LAWRENCE KRAUSS IS HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE LATEST IN SCIENCE NEWS. THAT’S NEXT ON “ARIZONA HORIZON.”>>”ARIZONA HORIZON” IS MADE POSSIBLE BY CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE FRIENDS OF ARIZONA PBS. MEMBERS OF YOUR PBS STATION. THANK YOU!>>Ted: GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO “ARIZONA HORIZON.” I’M TED SIMONS. FALLOUT CONTINUES OVER LAST NIGHT’S PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE BUT WHAT MAKES FOR A GOOD DEBATE AND WHAT SKILLS MAKE FOR A SUCCESSFUL DEBATER. JOINING US NOW IS ARIZONA’S HIGH SCHOOL SPEECH AND DEBATE COACH OF THE YEAR TIM CORNWELL, A DEBATE TEA PARTY AT McCLINTOCK HIGH SCHOOL IN TEMPE.>>THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.>>Ted: REGARDING DEBATING SKILLS, ARE THEY — CAN THEY BE INNATE OR SOMETHING YOU CAN TEACHER.>>I DEFINITELY THINK IT’S SOMETHING YOU CAN TEACHER TEACH. THERE’S A LITTLE BIT OF A INNATE QUALITY PEOPLE BEING A WARM SPEAKER AND BEING ABLE TO ENGAGE WITH THEIR AUDIENCE BUT MOST OF THEM CAN BE LEARN BY MOST PEOPLE DEPENDING ON HOW HARD THEY WANT TO WORK.>>Ted: SOMEONE WHO IS AFRAID OF AUDIENCES AND DOESN’T LIKE PUBLIC SPEAKING CAN THEY BECOME A GOOD DEBATER?>>I THINK THIS CAN BE. THEY CAN BE KNOWLEDGEABLE WITH THE SUBJECT MATTER AND CAN BE COACHED.>>Ted: WITHOUT GETTING INTO THE POLITICAL ASPECTS COMPARE DONALD TRUMP AND HILLARY CLINTON.>>DONALD TRUMP IS AN OFF THE CUFF TYPE OF SPEAKER. HE LIKES TO ENGAGE THE AUDIENCE WITH THINGS IN THE FOREFRONT OF HIS MIND. HE’S VERY AGGRESSIVE. IF I WANT TO PUT IT THAT WAY. HE SEEMS TO COME ACROSS LIKE I REALLY KNOWS WHAT HE’S TALKING ABOUT. HE DEFENDS HIMSELF VIGOROUSLY AND ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU HAVE HILLARY CLINTON, WHO IS VERY MUCH MORE RESERVED OF A SPEAKER. SHE SEEMS WHETHER OR NOT SHE IS OR NOT, MORE PREPARED WITH SOME OF HER RETORTS BUT SHE REALLY IS TRYING TO KEEP HERSELF CALM WHEN SHE’S REPLYING TO MOST OF QUESTIONS.>>Ted: IN THE FORMAL DEBATES, THESE ARE HIGH SCHOOL DEBATES AND A LOT OF FUNNY STUFF ISN’T ALLOWED BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE AGGRESSIVE AND DEFENSIVE LIKE A DONALD TRUMP, CAN THAT BE EFFECTIVE AS A DEBATER?>>IT CAN BE, AS LONG AS THEY’RE STICKING TO THE QUESTION AND MAKING SURE THAT THE LOGICAL ANSWERS ARE FLOWING FROM WHAT THE TOPIC IS. I’D SAY SOMETIMES THE ONLY TIME WHEN HE’S OFF-TOPIC, WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HE’S TRYING TO TALK ABOUT.>>Ted: INDEED, IS IT IMPORTANT AT TIMES TO SHOW PASSION, ANGER?>>I THINK ABSOLUTELY, AND THE PROBLEM IS YOU DON’T KNOW HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH. IT CAN WORK WELL TO HAVE EMOTION, THERE’S ALWAYS A LITTLE BIT OF EMOTIONAL APPEAL IN A DEBATE, BUT TOO MUCH YOU COULD LOSE SOME OF YOUR AUDIENCE FOR SURE AT NO. AND NOT ENOUGH, YOU — YOU COME ACROSS AS A ROBOT.>>Ted: I WAS GOING TO SAY, AS FAR AS BEING PRESIDENTIAL AND SHOWING CONFIDENCE IN YOURSELF, IS THAT A FACTOR IN THE NATIONAL DEBATES?>>I THINK IT IS, PEOPLE’S OPINION HOW SOMEONE PRESENTS THEMSELVES, IT COMES ACROSS IN THEIR SPEAKING STYLE. WHEN THEY’RE P CONFIDENT AND NOT FLUSTERED, I THINK IT SHOWS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF PRESENCE AND ABILITY TO LEAD.>>Ted: AS FAR AS PREPARATION, YOU MENTIONED THIS, BUT CAN YOU BE TOO PREPARED?>>ACTUALLY I THINK YOU CAN BE. IF YOU’RE TOO WORRIED ABOUT ALL. EVIDENCE YOU’RE TRYING TO PRESENT, IT CAN OVERWHELM YOU AND YOU CAN SORT OF LOSE THAT EMOTIONAL APPEAL AND BE VERY ROBOTIC AND BLAND. WE DON’T WANT THAT, NEXT A MEDIA DEBATE.>>Ted: AS FAR AS BEING UP PREPARED, YOU CAN — BUT — BUT THERE ARE SOME FOLKS WHO LIKE TO BE OFF THE CUFF AND MAY NOT KNOW X, Y, Z BUT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT A, B, C TO BE OK. HOW DO YOU WORK WITH THAT?>>IT CAN WORK EITHER WAY. BEING UP PREPARED TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS IF THEY DON’T KNOW FACTS OR NAMES, THAT CAN BE A PROBLEM, WE SAW THAT WITH A CANDIDATE IN THE NEWS RECENTLY. BUT THAT OFF THE CUFF STYLE ENGAGES A LOT OF PEOPLE. IT CAN REALLY BE EFFECTIVE AS LONG AS IT’S REELED IN AND YOU DON’T GO TOO FAR OFF TOPIC.>>Ted: HIGH SCHOOL DEBATE, NO INTERRUPTIONS?>>NO INTERRUPTIONS.>>Ted: ARE INTERRUPTIONS EVER EFFECTIVE?>>THINK IN THIS SORT OF MEDIA DEBATE THEY CAN BE. CONSTITUENT, SOMETIMES LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO STAND UP FOR THEMSELVES. AND BOTH OF THEM WERE TRYING NOT TO BE RUDE BUT THEY WERE REALLY TRYING TO STAND UP FOR THEMSELVES AS MUCH AS THEY COULD.>>Ted: THAT’S THE PERSON WHO DOES THE INTERRUPTING.>>YES.>>Ted: IF YOU’RE INTERRUPTED, HOW BEST TO RESPOND?>>THERE’S SO MANY WAYS TO RESPOND. YOU CAN RESPOND BY ARGUING BACK WITH THEM. SOMETIMES THAT GETS DROWNED OUT. OR YOU COULD BE VERY COURTEOUS AND TRY TO LET THEM HAVE THEIR TIME BUT ONCE AGAIN, IT’S CUTTING INTO YOUR SPEAKING TIME.>>Ted: RIGHT, YOU HAVE TO STAND UP FOR YOURSELF TO A CERTAIN DEGREE.>>YEAH.>>Ted: WHEN YOU’RE DEBATING AND YOU WANT TO GET YOUR POINT ACROSS, YOU FEEL — YOU’RE CRUISING OUT THERE. HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE CONNECTING WITH THE AUDIENCE, NOT TALKING PAST THEM OR OVER THEM, NOT CONDESCENDING TO THEM. HOW DO YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU DO?>>I THINK THAT MIGHT BE ONE OF THE HARDEST THINGS IN A — REALLY TRYING TO CONNECT AND ADAPT TO THE AUDIENCE BECAUSE THE AUDIENCE CAN BE DIFFERENT AT DIFFERENT TIMES BUT READ THEM AND ENGAGING THEM ESPECIALLY IN A TOWN HALL SORT OF DEBATE. TALKING TO THEM AND ACTUALLY MAKING EYE CONTACT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THAT SORT OF DEBATE.>>Ted: WHEN DOING DEBATING AND MAKING YOUR POINT, IF YOU WILL, CAN YOU TELL IF — YOU MAY THINK YOU’RE CRUISING BUT CAN YOU TELL IF YOU’VE GOT THE AUDIENCE WITH YOU, THE MODERATOR AND EVERYONE WITH YOU?>>YOU CAN DEPENDING ON HOW THEY’RE WEARING THEIR FACE. SOME PEOPLE, YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY HOW, AND SOME ARE GOOD AT STONE FACING, THEY CALL IT IN DEBATE, YOU HAVE NO IDEA IF THEY’RE AGREEING WITH YOU OR NOT.>>Ted: A POKER FACE?>>EXACTLY.>>Ted: APPEARANCE, DONALD TRUMP COULD NOT STAY OUT OF THE SHOT WHEN HILLARY CLINTON WAS SPECKING. HE WAS HOVERING AND SOME THOUGHT IT WAS EFFECTIVE AND SOME THOUGHT IT WAS WEIRD. BUT FROWNING AND SLUMPING, SPEAKING DOWN, ALL SORTS OF STUFF. WHAT DO YOU TELL YOUR KIDS.>>I WOULD NEVER PUT UP WITH ANY OF THAT. WE’RE TRYING TO MAINTAIN SOME DECORUM AND OBJECTIVE AND BEING PROFESSIONAL WITH MY STUDENTS IS NEVER USING LITTLE EMOTIONAL APPEALS OR FACING OR ROLLING YOUR EYES. IT’S KIND OF A RUDE GESTURE. AND PROBABLY IN THIS CASE, MOST OF THAT WAS DONE ON PURPOSE. I MEAN, AND TO A — MAYBE TRUMP’S CONSTITUENTS MIGHT ENJOY THAT.>>Ted: IT’S RUDE BUT YOU’RE GETTING YOUR POINT ACROSS.>>YOU’RE GETTING YOUR POINT ACROSS WHETHER OR NOT THAT’S THE POINT YOU WANT TO MAKE.>>Ted: HOW BEST TO PREPARE FOR A DEBATE? MAKE SURE YOU’RE NOT — EVERYTHING IS COMING OUT OF YOUR EARS OR WAKE UP AND ROLL OUT OF BED AND GO AND DO A DEBATE? WHAT’S THE BEST WAY.>>IT’S A EQUILIBRIUM. KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY, YOUR MESSAGE AND BE CONFIDENT IN YOUR MESSAGE AND PRESENT IT AND EVEN IF YOU’RE NOT EXACTLY CONFIDENT INSIDE YOU HAVE TO SHOW THE CONFIDENCE. EVEN IF YOU’RE JUST FAKING IT.>>Ted: INTERESTING, AND WHEN ONE OF YOUR STUDENTS, KIDS, ARE ACCUSED OF SOMETHING OR ASKED A QUESTION BY THE OTHER PERSON, AND IN THESE NATIONAL DEBATES NO ONE EVER ANSWERS A QUESTION. THEY MOVE ON TO WHAT THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT. WHAT DO YOU TEACH YOUR KIDS? IF I’M DEBATING YOU, DIDN’T YOU DO SOMETHING, I THINK YOU DID. DO YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION OR FRAME YOUR OWN?>>USUALLY YOU’RE RIGHT, DEFLECTING THE QUESTION CAN BE GOOD, AS LONG AS YOU’RE ON TOPIC. MAYBE REPHRASING IT TO THROW IT BACK AT THEM. BUT USUALLY STRAYING FROM THE TOPIC IN A HIGH SCHOOL OR COLLEGE DEBATE IS FROWNED ON, BECAUSE THAT’S NOT WHAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT AND YOUR OPPONENT CAN POINT THAT OUT AND THE JUDGE OR MODERATOR MAY TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT.>>Ted: THE JUDGES ARE LOOKING FOR DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF DEBATE, AS OPPOSED IT JUST WINNING OVER THE AUDIENCE. THERE ARE FORMALITIES.>>ABSOLUTELY, WHEN YOU’RE LOOKING FOR LOGICAL EVIDENCE COMING THROUGH AND THE EMOTIONAL APPEAL BUT IT’S ALL EMOTIONAL APPEAL UNDERSTANDING A FORMAL DEBATE THAT COULD HARM YOU.>>Ted: CONGRATULATIONS ON BEING THE DEBATE COACH OF THE YEAR. IN A POLITICAL SEASON, GOOD FOR YOU.>>THANK YOU.>>Ted: TIME NOW FOR A LIVELY AND INFORMATIVE UPDATE OF THE LATEST SCIENCE NEWS WITH OUR GOOD FRIEND, BEST-SELLING SCIENCE WRITER AND WORLD RENOWNED PHYSICIST. HERE HE IS, LAWRENCE KRAUSS. GOOD TO SEE YOU.>>I’M NOT OVERLY PREPARED. [LAUGHTER]>>Ted: ARE YOU OFF THE CUFF.>>NOT QUITE, TRYING TO GET THAT EQUILIBRIUM IN THERE.>>Ted: I’LL TRY NOT TO INTERRUPT YOU. BUT IF YOU SAY SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS WRONG.>>I’M DEFLECT.>>Ted: THE ROSETTA MISSION APPARENTLY IS ENDING. WHAT IS THE ROSETTA MISSION AND HOW BIG OF A DEAL.>>WE’VE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE AS YOU MAY REMEMBER. THIS IS A MISSION TO A COMET. THE FIRST MISSION TO ORBIT A COMET. FROM OUTSIDE OF NEPTUNE AND THIS — AND WHAT IT’S DOING — IT’S SAMPLING MATERIAL FROM THE BEGINNING OF OUR SOLAR SYSTEM, 4.5 BILLION YEARS AGO. BUT IMAGINE SENDING A SPACECRAFT TO NOT ONLY LOOK AT IT, BUT TO LAND A LANDER ON IT. IT TOOK A DECADE TO GET THERE. YOU HAVE TO CATCH UP TO A THING THAT’S GOING TOWARD THE SUN AND FOLLOW IT ALONG. THERE’S A ROSETTA MISSION AND IT LED A LANDER, WHICH AS YOU MAY REMEMBER, WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT IN AN EARLIER EPISODE, LANDED AND BOUNCED INTO A CREVASSE AND SUDDENLY SEEN AGAIN.>>Ted: PEEKING OUT OF THE THING THERE.>>EXACTLY. THE MATERIAL THAT MAKES UP A COMET WHICH IS PRIMORDIAL MATERIAL. IT LOOKS LIKE TWO BIG SNOWBALLS.>>Ted: HOW BIG IS IT?>>LESS THAN A KILOMETER OR TWO ACROSS.>>Ted: NOT THAT BIG. NO, IT’S BIG ENOUGH TO HOLD ITSELF TOGETHER GRAVITY GRAVITATIONALLY, BUT THE MISSION DISCOVERED IT’S ACTUALLY 70% OF THE VOLUME OF THAT THING IS EMPTY. LIKE FRESHLY POWDERED SNOW AND COVERED BY ROCK AND SAND ON THE OUTSIDE, IT’S MOSTLY DIRTY ROCK AND ORGANIC MATERIAL WHICH IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE THINK SOME OF THOSE ORGANIC MATERIALS MAY HAVE GIVEN THE NECESSARY AGREEMENTS FOR LIFE OR EARTH.>>Ted: LOOK AT THAT.>>IT LOOKS LIKE A LITTLE PLANET.>>Ted: IT DOES.>>BUT THE GRAVITY IS SO SMALL, WHEN ROSETTA ENDS ITS MISSION IN A POETIC WAY. THE COMET HAD GONE AROUND THE SUN AND STARTED ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, WHEN IT WAS ON ONE SIDE OF THE SUN, FOLLOWING ALONG AS IT GOT EXCITED AND NEAR THE SUN AND THEN ON THE FAR TAIL OF THE SUN, IT — IT — THE SUNLIGHT WAS DETERIORATING AND IT’S SOLAR POWERED SO IT WAS GOING TO DIE SO, LET IT CRASH INTO THE COMET BY LETTING THE GRAVITY OF THE COMET ATTRACT IT AT A SPEED TWO KILOMETERS PERFECT HOUR WHICH IS SLOWER THAN YOU WALK HOME AND FLAT-LINED OUT. CRASHED GENTLY, BOUNCED GENTLY AND STOPPED SENDING THE SIGNAL AND THAT’S THE END OF THE MISSION THAT TOOK A DECADE.>>Ted: NO MORE DATA OR INFORMATION, IT SITS THERE AND TAKES A RIDE. HOW LONG?>>THAT’S A GOOD QUESTION, IT COULD BE TAKING A RIDE FOR AS LONG AS THE COMET SURVIVES.>>Ted: HOW LONG DO YOU THINK IT’S GOING TO BE.>>I DON’T KNOW. THESE COMETS IT ORBITS THAT TAKE MANY YEARS AND EVENTUALLY COULD CRASH INTO THE SUN, THIS THING COULD GO AROUND MANY TIMES IN THE SPACECRAFT AND THE LANDER, STUCK IN THE CREVASSE. A LOT OF THE MATERIALS IS EVAPORATED OR ABLATED BY THE MATERIAL OUT OF THE SUN.>>Ted: AND EVENTUALLY, IT WILL BE JETTISONED OFF.>>IT WILL BE IN THE ORBIT.>>Ted: IF I SIMILAR MISSIONS READY TO GO?>>THERE ARE OTHER MISSIONS TO COMETS PLANNED BUT I DON’T KNOW WHEN THEY’RE GOING TO LAND. I THOUGHT THIS MIGHT BE A LOADED QUESTION.>>Ted: I MIGHT KNOW SOMETHING, BUT I CAN’T TELL YOU. THERE’S A MOON OF JUPITER THAT APPARENTLY HAS WATER-LIKE –>>WHAT’S NEAT, EUROPA, IT’S A ICE COVERED MOON, AND WHAT WAS DISCOVERED, OF COURSE, IS THAT THE GRAVITY OF JUNIPER IS STRONG ENOUGH, TO CREATE A LIQUID OCEAN UNDER THAT ICE OF THE GRAVITY IS SLOSHING THINGS AROUND AND HEATS IT UP ENOUGH THAT THERE’S A DEEP OCEAN THAT CONTAINS MORE WATER THAN ALL OF THE OCEANS ON EARTH. WE THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT POTENTIAL POSSIBILITY TO LOOK FOR LIFE. BECAUSE THERE’S A DEEP OCEAN THAT’S WARM AND WHAT WE’RE SEEING, THE DISCOLORED MATERIAL, ORGANIC MATERIAL, THERE’S AN OCEAN AND ORGANIC TERMS INSIDE OF A ICE-COVERED MOON. SO WE PLANNED FLY-BY MISSIONS OF EUROPA AND TO DRILL DOWN INTO THE KILOMETERS OF ICE AND GET DOWN TO THE OCEAN. 2012, 2013, DOING SPECTROSCOPY, BUT WHEN EUROPA PASSED IN FRONT OF JUPITER, YOU COULD LOOK AT THE AURORA OF — OF EUROPA AND WHAT WAS SEEN WAS WHAT LOOKED LIKE PLUMES OF WATER AS IF IT HAD BEEN INFERRED TO FOUR YEARS AGO, AT THE SEEM TO BE INTERMITTENT AND SHOOT 125-MILES UP. HOLY SMOKES!>>WHAT’S NEAT, IF THAT’S THE CASE, WE CAN SAMPLE THE WATER OF EUROPA WITHOUT DRILLING DOWN. WE CAN SEND A SPACECRAFT THROUGH IT AND LOOK FOR EVIDENCE OF LIFE. IT MIGHT BE A REALLY GOOD FIRST STEP.>>Ted: THE SIZE OF EUROPA COMPARED TO EARTH?>>SMALLER.>>Ted: A LOT SMALLER.>>A LOT SMALLER.>>Ted: BUT MORE WATER.>>IT’S SOLID WATER, THE EARTH ISN’T, IT’S ROCK. BASICALLY HUNDREDS OF KILOMETERS NICK OF WATER UNDER — OF WATER, UNDER THE ICE. IT’S SMALLER AND THAT THE EARTH AND IT’S BASICALLY A BALL OF WATER SURROUNDED BY ICE, IT’S LIKE A BAKED ALASKA, IN THAT SENSE. IT’S MORE WATER THAN ALL OF THE OCEANS ON EARTH.>>Ted: WHAT DOES THAT TELL E TELL US WHAT IS HAPPENING?>>IT CONFIRMS WHAT WE THOUGHT. THERE’S A LOT GOING ON. BECAUSE OF THE HEAT GENERATED BY THE TIDAL FORCE, THE INCREDIBLE GRAVITY OF JUNIPER, IT’S CAUSING A LOT OF DISTURBANCES AND WE’VE SEEN WATER GEYSERS ON OTHER MOONS OF JUPITER AND SATURN.>>Ted: REALLY?>>YEAH, WE HAVE. AND THERE’S INTERNAL LEAST BEING GENERATED THAT SOME OF THAT WATER IS PUSHED UP AND THE FACT THAT WE SEE IT, EUROPA AND BEEN ABLE TO IMAGE IT AND GO 125-MILES OFF THE MOON, MEANS AS I SAY FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF LOOKING FOR THE INGREDIENTS OF LIFE IT’S EXCITING.>>Ted: IS THAT ONE OF THE PRIME PROSPECTS?>>FOR MANY THEY THOUGHT IT WAS — EUROPA WAS THE PRIME PROSPECT. MAYBE EVEN MORE INTERESTING THAN MARS.>>Ted: OK. THIS IS NOT DEALING WITH OUTER SPACES SO MUCH AS –>>GOING FROM THE OUTER REACHES OF COMETS TO EUROPA, COMING TO JUPITER AND NOW ON EARTH.>>Ted: AND GOODNESS KNOWS HOW MANY HUNDRED OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO, THE IDEA — WE SAW THIS ON NOVA RECENTLY.>>TELL ME WHAT YOU LEARNED.>>Ted: CAN’T DIVULGE. WE THINK WE KNOW, ONE GROUP SAID WE’RE OUT OF HERE, IN AFRICA.>>LOOKING AT THE GENETIC MAKEUP OF HUMANS FROM THE VARIETY OF CIVILIZATIONS. WE’VE KNOWN THAT OUR BASIS IS IN AFRICA. EARLY MODERN HUMANS DEVELOPED ABOUT 200,000 YEARS AGO PROBABLY IN SOUTHERN AFRICA. THAT’S THE KNOWN, THE QUESTION IS HOW DID THEY GO AND POPULATE THE REST OF THE WORLD. WHILE WE KNOW THAT BY 50,000 YEARS AGO, HUMANS WERE IN EUROPE AND BASICALLY MAKING THE NEANDERTHALS EXTINCT AND MAYBE AUSTRALIA AND OTHER PLACES. WHAT IS INTERESTING, THREE RECENT STUDIES HAVE LOOKED AT NOT JUST THE SMALL POPULATION BUT HUNDREDS OF INDIVIDUALS COMPLETELY LOOKING AT THEIR COMPLETE HUMAN GENOME FROM MANY COUNTRIES AND RACIAL BACKGROUNDS, HAVE — ALL CONVERGED ON THE SAME IDEA. INDEPENDENT STUDIES DONE FOR INDEPENDENT PURPOSES THAT BASICALLY A SINGLE WAVE, YOU AND I DESCEND FROM A SINGLE WAVE OF HUMANS THAT LEFT AFRICA. THERE WERE PROBABLY OTHERS THAT LEFT EARLIER, BUT BECAME EXTINCT. THE MODERN HUMANS MAY HAVE KILLED THEM. AND IT’S INTERESTING, THERE HAVE BEEN FINDINGS LOOKING AT ABORIGINAL TRIBES IN AUSTRALIA AND OTHER PLACES THAT SUGGESTS THERE WERE — EVIDENCE OF FAR OLDER GROUPS THAT HAD NO GENETIC RELATIONSHIP TO MODERN HUMANS NOW. YOU KNOW, EXCEPT THE ONES WHO COULD — THE COMMON ANCESTORS, THAT MAY BE CAME OUT EARLIER AND WHAT WAS DISCOVERED IN ONE OF THE STUDIES AND ONLY ONE OUT OF THE THREE, IN THE ABORIGINALS IN AUSTRALIA SEEMED TO HAVE 2% OF THEIR DNA POTENTIALLY COMING FROM ONE OF THESE MUCH OLDER GROUPS THAT MAY HAVE ARRIVED. THERE WAS ONE WAVE, THERE WERE OTHER WAVES, BUT BASICALLY ALL OF US CAME FROM THE WAVE FROM AFRICA THAT LEFT 50,000 YEARS AGO. WHY DID THEY LEAVE? PROBABLY CLIMATE VARIATIONS.>>Ted: AH!>>AND THAT’S INTERESTING, BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT THEY MOVED AS THE HABITAT CHANGED AND FOOD CHANGED AND IT’S A LOCAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THAT. CURTIS MARION AT ASU, LEADS A GROUP THAT STUDIED A CAVE IN SOUTHERN AFRICA CONTINUOUSLY INHABITED. AND CLIMATE CHANGE AND THEIR FOOD CHANGED, AND TO PROMOTE SOMETHING IN A WEEK, OCTOBER 19th, A EVENT, AN ORIGINS PROJECT, ON EXTINCTIONS AND LOVE AND INCONVENIENT TRUTH AND CURTIS WILL BE THERE TALKING ABOUT HOW IT’S POSSIBLE THAT YOU AND I AND EVERYONE EMERGED FROM THAT SMALL GROUP IN THAT CAVE THAT AT ONE POINT COULD HAVE BEEN 500 INDIVIDUALS.>>Ted: WOW!>>WE WERE THAT CLOSE TO BEING EXTINCT AND WE’RE GOING TO HAVE A PULITZER PRIZE WINNING AUTHOR, AND WE’LL TALK ABOUT MODERN EXTINCTION. OCTOBER 19th. CLIMATE CHANGE, IT MAY HAVE DRIVEN THOSE PEOPLE OUT BECAUSE THIS IS OVER TENS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS, AND THAT BRINGS US TO THE PRESENT.>>Ted: CAN YOU BRING US TO THE PRESENT QUICKLY. I KNOW YOU HAVE A CO2 THING.>>WE HAD A LANDMARK LAST THURSDAY, A MOMENT IN EARTH’S HISTORY, WE MONITOR CO2, SINCE THE 1950, STARTED BY CHARLES HEELING ON A MOUNTAINTOP IN HAWAII, VERY FRESH AIR COMING FROM THE PACIFIC AND FIRST STARTED TO NOTICE THAT CO2 WAS RISING, 1500 PARTS PER MILLION. 800 — UP TO 8,000 YEARS AGO, IT WAS — IT WENT FROM 150 PARTS PER MILLION TO 280 PARTS PER MILLION. WE PASSED A MILESTONE LAST THURSDAY, WITH — FOR THE FIRST TIME FOR A FULL DAY AND IT VARIES AS IT GOES UP AND DOWN, DEPENDING ON WHETHER THE TREES ARE OUT AND TAKE CARBON DIOXIDE, BUT THE EARTH PASSED 400 PARTS PER MILLION. WHICH IS DREADFUL. THE CURRENT PARIS ACCORDS, THE RATE WE’RE GOING, THE EARTH IS NOW WHERE IT’S NEVER BEEN BEFORE, WE PASSED A MILESTONE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER PASSED. 400 PARTS PER MILLION, WHICH DIDN’T EXIST AT ANY TIME. RIGHT BACK TO THE EARLY MODERN HUMAN, BACK TO THREE MILLION YEARS, LAST THURSDAY WAS AN UNFORTUNATE MILESTONE THAT WE SHOULD TRY AND USE AS A WAY IT GET BACK TO WHERE WE ONCE WERE.>>Ted: 2030 SECONDS LEFT. IS THERE NO TURNING BACK THEN?>>NO TURNING BACK UNLESS WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET CARBON OUT OF THE SPHERE, WE CAN — ATMOSPHERE, WE COULD CONSERVE AND USE RENEWABLE FUELS BUT THE CARBON WILL STAY THERE FOR 600 TO A THOUSAND YEARS AND THE UNITED STATES AND THE DEVELOPING WORLD PUT THE CARBON THAT’S THERE NOW. IF YOU BREAK IT, YOU’VE GOT TO FIX IT.>>Ted: ON THAT PLEASANT NOTE, THANKS FOR JOINING US. CAN’T WAIT TO BRING YOU BACK. [LAUGHTER]>>NICE TO BE HERE.>>>TUESDAY ON “ARIZONA HORIZON,” A SPECIAL ONE-HOUR DEBATE BETWEEN THE FIVE CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR THE THREE OPEN SEATS ON THE STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION. AN HOUR LONG DEBATE ON THE NEXT “ARIZONA HORIZON.” AND A REMINDER JOIN US AT 7:00 P.M. TONIGHT FOR THE SPECIAL ELECTION 2016 DEBATE BETWEEN SENATOR JOHN McCAIN AND HIS DEMOCRATIC CHALLENGER, ANN KIRKPATRICK. TONIGHT AT 7:00 RIGHT HERE ON ARIZONA PBS. THAT’S IT FOR NOW, I’M TED SIMONS. THANKS FOR JOINING US! YOU HAVE A GREAT EVENING!