The World Waits While Trump and Putin Meet

Summary

Below is a detailed summary of the episode “The World Waits While Trump and Putin Meet” from The Charlie Kirk Show (August 15, 2025). The episode blends commentary on high-stakes international diplomacy with an in‐depth discussion on fossil fuels, energy policy, and the climate debate, all delivered in Charlie Kirk’s signature unapologetically conservative style.

──────────────────────────────

1. OVERVIEW
   ────────────────────────────── • The episode centers on the historic, high-risk meeting between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska—an unprecedented summit aimed at ending the ongoing Ukrainian war and potentially resetting U.S.–Russia relations.
   • Alongside geopolitical analysis, host Charlie Kirk and guest Edward Kovalik explore the “biggest lies” surrounding global warming, environmentalism, and fossil fuels.
   • Issues of energy independence, the continued importance of fossil fuels, and the impact on both local jobs and geopolitics are discussed in detail.

────────────────────────────── 2. TRUMP & PUTIN: A RISKY DIPLOMATIC ENDEAVOR
────────────────────────────── • [00:00–00:38] Introductory remarks set the stage, with lively praise for Trump and his ability to confront international adversaries.
– A (Charlie Kirk) introduces the summit, noting, “Trump and Putin sit down in Alaska and we lay it all out.” – B emphasizes Trump’s courage: “He is trying to stop his seventh war…he does not want to see the bloodshed.”
• The discussion highlights Trump’s decision to fly across North America—a move described as “President Trump at his best”—intended to avert further casualties in Ukraine.

────────────────────────────── 3. GEOPOLITICAL DYNAMICS & THE UKRAINIAN WAR
────────────────────────────── • Conversation turns to the rationale behind the U.S.–Russia summit:
– The panel debates why Putin is voluntarily flying to America rather than meeting on neutral ground.
– They note that this is the first presidential meeting between a U.S. President and Putin in over four years and contrast Trump’s actions with Biden’s reluctance.
• The host discusses the “three core demands” (as referenced from Professor Mearsheimer via Tucker Carlson) that Russia has for peace:
• A neutral Ukraine not allied with NATO,
• No U.S. security guarantee or offensive Ukrainian military capability, and
• Recognition of Crimea (and territories annexed by Russia).
• A memorable quote at [12:37] by speaker C reads:
“He is not meeting with a friend. He is meeting with an adversary. And an adversary who wants to see the destruction of the United States and the Western alliance.”
• The discussion covers past failed diplomatic overtures (e.g., the Istanbul negotiation) and laments that decades of miscalculation have led to unnecessary loss of life and regional instability.

────────────────────────────── 4. ENERGY POLICY & THE FOSSIL FUELS NARRATIVE
────────────────────────────── • A critical portion of the episode (starting around [17:30]) features Edward Kovalik, Chairman and CEO of the Prayer Operating Group and an “energy truth teller.”
– Edward explains that “oil, fossil fuels basically drive the entire global economy,” noting the strategic importance of energy production in geopolitics.
– He also praises Trump’s focus on keeping oil prices low to protect everyday Americans.
• Key points on fossil fuels include:
• The steady, linear growth in global fossil fuel demand since the early 20th century.
• The inherent inefficiency and impracticality of transitioning completely to solar and wind energy—“there is no energy transition, only energy addition.”
• Historical data is cited by Edward indicating that even massive CO2 concentrations in Earth’s past did not correlate with catastrophic climate effects, but rather periods of planetary “tropicalization” and greening.

────────────────────────────── 5. DEBUNKING ENVIRONMENTAL LIES & CLIMATE MYTHS
────────────────────────────── • The conversation debunks popular claims against fossil fuels:
– At [25:30], Edward addresses accusations like those in “Frack Nation” by arguing there is “no proven correlation between fossil fuel use and climate change.”
– He asserts that “global CO2 levels have no direct, causal link to climate change when looking back at climate for 200 million years.” • Charlie and Edward assert that many environmentalist narratives are politically motivated moves meant to create energy scarcity and, ultimately, poverty.
• The discussion also touches on how the current administration is “exposing real science behind climate” and distancing itself from misrepresented data used by earlier critics.

────────────────────────────── 6. ENERGY IN THE ERA OF AI AND THE GLOBAL ECONOMY
────────────────────────────── • The episode explores the role of fossil fuels in supporting technological advances, notably artificial intelligence:
– Edward highlights that training AI models requires energy comparable to powering multiple homes for an entire year (around [24:05]).
– There is concern that AI data centers, coupled with an aging U.S. electrical grid, could lead to energy rationing if fossil fuel production is curtailed. • The host argues that limiting fossil fuel production is not only economically unsound but also politically dangerous, especially given the competitive global landscape where energy underpins modern prosperity.

────────────────────────────── 7. THE BUSINESS IMPACT & POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
────────────────────────────── • Edward details the challenges facing the U.S. oil industry today:
– Shale oil’s high decline rate means maintaining production levels is an ongoing challenge.
– Federal policies regarding land leasing, infrastructure, and environmental regulations (like EPA emissions rules) are critical for boosting domestic production.
• The conversation acknowledges the delicate balance between encouraging increased production and managing oil prices, emphasizing that historically, lower prices can eventually spur higher prices due to production adjustments. • A memorable exchange at [31:27] notes:
“Low oil prices create high oil prices because people, you know, stop producing as much oil.”

────────────────────────────── 8. CONCLUSIONS & FINAL THOUGHTS
────────────────────────────── • The episode wraps up with a call for a pragmatic, fact-based conversation about energy and geopolitics.
– Both speakers emphasize the need for negotiations that would end prolonged conflict in Ukraine—even if that means accepting some concessions, such as a neutral Ukraine and recognition of Russia’s territorial gains.
– Charlie Kirk critiques the establishment and European ruling class for missing earlier opportunities to negotiate peace and portrays Trump’s willingness to engage with Putin as a “power move” that could lead to lasting change.
• The discussion leaves listeners with a clear message: confront the oversimplified climate narratives and embrace a robust energy policy that supports American jobs, technological progress (like AI), and long-term national prosperity.

────────────────────────────── 9. NOTABLE QUOTES & TIMESTAMPS
────────────────────────────── • [00:00–00:38] – Introduction by Charlie Kirk and guest B highlighting Trump’s bold moves:
“Trump is trying to stop his seventh war…he does not want to see the bloodshed.”
• [12:37] – A critical snippet from speaker C underlining the significance of the summit:
“He is not meeting with a friend. He is meeting with an adversary. And an adversary who wants to see the destruction of the United States and the Western alliance.”
• [24:05] – Edward on AI’s energy appetite:
“Training one single AI model uses as much energy as electricity needed to power 100 homes in a year.”

────────────────────────────── FINAL REMARKS
────────────────────────────── This episode tackles the intersection of global diplomacy, military conflict, and energy policy, underscoring that while the world debates climate change and renewable energy, fossil fuels remain the engine of modern society. By challenging environmental dogma and underscoring the practical realities of energy demand, both Charlie Kirk and Edward Kovalik provide listeners with an alternative perspective on how to secure American prosperity—and peace—in a rapidly changing world.

For those who haven’t listened yet, this comprehensive discussion not only reviews the Trump–Putin summit and its potential implications but also provides a grounded critique of popular environmental narratives, making it essential viewing for anyone interested in the true undercurrents of geopolitics and energy policy.

Transcript

[A]

Hey, everybody. Charlie Kirk here live from the Bitcoin.com studio, the stakes. Trump and Putin sit down in Alaska and we lay it all out. And then what are the biggest lies when it comes to global warming, environmentalism and drilling? Go to oilfacts.com as our guest Edward Kovalik goes through oilfacts.com email us. As always, freedomarliekirk.com, buckle up, everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

[B]

Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are.

[A]

Lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.

[B]

I want to thank Charlie.

[A]

He's an incredible guy.

[B]

His spirit, his love of this country.

[A]

He's done an amazing job building one.

[B]

Of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point usa.

[A]

We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Today's a very, very big day, and we're going to be covering it throughout the day as breaking news happens. But first, we want to foreshadow, and more importantly, you just want to describe what is happening before the big meeting in Alaska. President Donald Trump right now is on a plane. He's on Air Force One. He's on a plane flying from Joint Force Joint Andrews Air Force Base all the way across the North American continent to Alaska. Before we go into the details of this, I just want to say this is President Trump at his best. He does not have to be doing this. He doesn't. He's trying to stop his seventh war. Let me say that again. He is trying to stop his seventh war. He's flying all the way across America and across Canada, confronting a foreign leader and taking a risk that this very well could fail because he wants peace. The president is doing this because he does not want to see the bloodshed, the suffering of 5 to 7,000 people dying per week. And for what? What is the goal? What is the objective? And if it's 5 to 7,000 people a week, you're talking about 3 to 400,000 people a year, generations of young Ukrainians and Russians, because the Russians matter, too. The Russians are made in the image of God here, too. Plus all the casualties and all the refugees. And for what? President Donald Trump is taking a mature approach here. Now, mind you, this summit comes on the heels of President Trump rushing more artillery and more military support for Ukraine. You see, Putin had a certain calculation. Putin thought that if Trump was gonna send all of these armaments to Ukraine that the MAGA base would revolt against Donald Trump. There's been no such revolt. Actually. We might not love the idea of further armaments, but we trust the president and we have confidence the President that he's using that towards a peace settlement. Vladimir Putin very well might have misread the room. The buried lead of this is not the fact that President Trump is flying across the continent that should be appreciated, but instead, why is Putin flying? Why is Putin kinda taking the beta role here, flying to America, not on his turf or on neutral ground. What is Putin doing? That's the part that has fascinated me throughout all this and I wanna explore that together. Because Putin doesn't have to be sending in tons of aircraft. Reports are showing he's bringing in like 500 people and they're flying in planes. I mean a lot of ordinary Russians are pretty angry about this summit. So what is Putin doing here? This is the first presidential meeting between a US President and Putin in over four years. Biden had no interest in this. So we know why Trump is doing it because he loves America. The he doesn't want to see us in another boondoggle, doesn't want to see us in a quagmire. And his heart hurts for 7,000 dead people a week. And for all the liberals that attack Donald Trump, he is a better person than Joe Biden cuz he actually cares about 7,000 Russians and Ukrainians dying. He's doing something to stop it. But what is Putin doing here? That's the fascinating part. I don't have a clear answer, except I think Putin wants an end to this war more than he is broadcasting now. Look, we need to set expectations cautiously. Hundreds of thousands of people have died in this war. Wars radicalize their participants. Definitionally, it is a lot harder to end a three year war than it is to end a three week one. That's why the original Istanbul overture to end the war early on, that was our best shot. The because when you get deep into a war, they say, well they bombed this church and they bombed this village and they did a drone strike and they did an attack and they're bombers and blah blah, blah, blah. Therefore we must keep on escalating. Wars have a tendency to do that. Russia has three core demands for peace. Neutral Ukraine, this is the key. This is the Russia's the big three. And no other program's gonna tell you this. And we got this from Professor Mearsheimer, he said this on the Tucker Carlson program and it was really, really important Professor Mearsheimer said these are the three things. A neutral Ukraine not in NATO, and no US Security guarantee, no offensive Ukrainian military capability, and recognition of Crimea, plus the four Oblasts annexed by Russia. Now, are those 100% required? The answer is we don't know, because the Washington foreign policy establishment has refused to ever negotiate. How do you know what Russia wants when. When you can't negotiate? They refused before the war, and they blew up negotiations, as I mentioned in Istanbul. And that was our great moment. Istanbul was. It was such a human rights crime. Boris Johnson and Tony Blinken and the US Security establishment did something unspeakably evil. There was a chance to end the Russian Ukrainian war, and the Russians were willing to do it. In the first couple of weeks, I think it was 10 days in, and we said no. And now hundreds of thousands of more Ukrainians were used as cannon fodder for some abstract regime goal of the foreign security apparatus, and Biden sabotaged it. Of all the things in Biden's legacy, this is one of the most unspeakably dark moves of his administration. An entire generation of young Ukrainians died, and Russia took more territory. So it was for nothing. But if we were actually willing to negotiate, maybe peace would actually be possible. If we're willing to say no, Ukraine and NATO and we'll recognize Russia holding Crimea in the Donbass, maybe Russia will let Ukraine keep its military, or maybe they'll evacuate some of the territory they've captured. We don't know. It's possible because nobody has tried to negotiate until President Trump. Until now with President Trump. I will say of the three guarantees, the most reasonable to the least reasonable. Okay, so no NATO, no security guarantee, no offensive Ukrainian military capability. And then the recognition of Crimea plus the land of the most reasonable. I think the land is the most reasonable. They won it. They invaded. They shouldn't have invaded, but they won it. Giving it back to Ukraine after Russia, that's not going to happen. So the European elite have to take the pillar and stomach the fact that Vladimir Putin won back part of Ukraine, including Crimea. Okay, I think that's. I don't like it. He shouldn't have invaded. But of all the contentions, that's one that I think there is some flex in the joints. Number two, though, is a little bit harder, which is a neutral Ukraine. Now there's two parts of that. Ukraine should not be part of NATO, but then the security guarantee there was like the Minsk agreement. So there's some, you know, component there. The last one, just looking at this as an honest onlooker, as an American who doesn't have as much skin in the game, saying that Ukraine can't have offensive weaponry capability. That's basically just saying we want them to be a sitting duck. Is Ukraine really going to invade Russia? Maybe. Or the new territories? I guess Russia can't demand the disarmament of another country while they are a major power. I think that's a little bit silly. But maybe Russia can come to a deal which is, okay, you get the land, no NATO, and then Ukraine can keep its military. Will they strike that deal? We don't know. President Donald Trump has said that he will know in the first couple of minutes whether or not Vladimir Putin is ready or not. Ukraine would probably only fight to take back the regions occupied by Russia. So this could end up being like an endless multi decade war. But I want to repeat something. What is Putin doing here? Because Putin is on pace right now to win an ugly victory. Ugly, hard fought, lots of death. But why is Vladimir Putin getting on an airplane and flying to Alaska? Not in Belarus, not in Switzerland, not in Abu Dhabi, not in Doha, but he's flying to America. When's the last time Vladimir Putin was on American soil? Maybe a decade ago. What is Putin doing here? I have a theory that we're going to explore after the break because I actually think Vladimir Putin deep down would much rather have a soft working relationship with the United States of America than Russia. Russia and China are not nearly the natural allies that you think they are. And maybe that might be the buried lead as to why Vladimir Putin is getting on a plane and flying to Anchorage. If you're tired of watching this country drift away from the values that made it great, it's time to get involved. That's why I stand with amac, the association of Mature American Citizens. AMAC is the conservative alternative to aarp. And it's not just for seniors. If you love America, believe in the Constitution and support the principles of faith, family and freedom, this is your movement. AMAC members receive great perks, including discounts on travel insurance and health care, free access to exclusive resources, and the award winning AMAC magazine delivered right to your door. And right now you can join for as little as $1.20 a month with a five year membership. Join millions of patriots who still believe in this country. Visit AMAC US Kirk, and become a member. Today, Russian President Vladimir Putin makes a rare public appearance at a monument honoring U.S. cooperation during World War II, just hours before his summit with President Trump. Now Putin is getting A lot of domestic backlash for even having this meeting, because, remember, wars radicalize people. Why are you meeting with the Americans? They're providing armaments. So what is Putin thinking here? Well, number one, Vladimir Putin wants Russia to be wealthy. And right now, America holds a lot of cards. This is Putin going up to a. A memorial. Pretty good optics, honestly. And we did work with the Russians to defeat the Nazis, and I'm glad we did. We cannot forget about our partnership working with the Soviet Union. Now, what happened after that is the Soviet Union became a gulag infested death camp. However, at that time, that was the right move. It absolutely was the right move. Unquestionably. So. Vladimir Putin makes a rare appearance at a monument honoring US cooperation during World War II. He's now on a plane flying like 14 hours from Moscow, and he's going to land in acreage quite soon. We do better working with Russia than being at war with them. And remember, it all ties together. We have all this new russiagate stuff thanks to the Durham annex. A lot of the anti Russia sentiment was fake. It was manufactured, it was synthetic. It was led you to believe that they manipulated our election and that's why Donald Trump won. So you have to wonder, does Russia hate us, or did our ruling class make us hate Russia and then Russia strike back. Should Russia have invaded Ukraine? No, it's not a defensible position. However, was NATO expansion taunting and daunting to the Russian Federation? Yes. This is a new clip from Hill Dog. Let's play cut 511.

[C]

He is not meeting with a friend. He is meeting with an adversary. And an adversary who wants to see the destruction of the United States and the Western alliance. But if he could bring about the end to this terrible war where Putin is the aggressor invading a neighbor country, trying to change the borders, if he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, had to, in a way validate Putin's vision of Greater Russia, but instead could really stand up to Putin to make it clear there must be a ceasefire. There will be no exchange of territory. If President Trump were the architect of that, I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize.

[A]

Okay. There's a lot there, a lot of ifs. We recklessly stoked a war that never had to happen. We stoked a conflict by expanding NATO without purpose and refusing to negotiate anything related to it. We acted arrogantly and Ukraine paid the price. Is this an opportunity for a Russian reset? Do I Think we're going to get the Anchorage Accords? No. Do I think that it's a really positive sign that Putin is flying all across his continent to go to a state, by the way, that used to be his talking about land swaps. Alaska used to be Russia's. We bought it in the mid-1800s for $7.4 million. I believe that was the number. Pretty good deal, right? Move. Remember, Trump said this is a setup for a second meeting. And if I were to conjecture a little bit, I think President Trump is like, ugh, I could totally get a deal with Putin. If it wasn't for Brussels, if it wasn't for the European ruling class, I think this deal could easily be cut. Yeah, $7.2 million in 1867, equivalent to $129 million. So we bought Alaska for 129 million bucks. It's amazing. Before, they really understood petroleum. Now, does Zelensky want peace? Do the intel agencies want peace? What President Trump is doing is he is short circuiting conventional norms of protocol. Oh, you can't do that. You can't meet with them. A lot of people are going to be critical of this whole thing. But it's Putin coming to us. It's Putin coming to America. That's a power move. I think we hold a lot more cards here than sometimes we realize. The military industrial complex does not want peace. And I think Putin, by flying all the way to Alaska, is signaling ever so carefully, hey, man, we're better together than we are apart. Yeah, there's a lot of problems. You're not gonna be best friends. This is not gonna be like an American UK relationship. But we are better than the ccp. And make no mistake, the Russian, China thing, they're not as natural allies as you think. They've had a lot of problems throughout the years. That is a forced marriage. That is an arranged marriage. The Russia, Chinese thing is an arranged marriage by the intel operations, as President Trump would famously said, we'll say, we'll see what happens. We're honored to be partnering with the Alan Jackson Ministries. And today I want to point you to their podcast. It's called Culture and Christianity. The Alan Jackson Podcast. What makes it unique is Pastor Allen's biblical perspective. He takes the truth from the Bible and applies it to issues that we're facing today. Gender confusion, abortion, immigration, Doge Trump and the White House issues in the church. He doesn't just discuss the problems in every episode. He gives practical things we can do to make a difference. His guests have incredible expertise and powerful testimonies. Each episode will make you recognize the power of your faith and how God can use your life to impact our world. Today. The Culture and Christianity Podcast is informative and encouraging. You can find it on YouTube, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Be sure to subscribe so you don't miss any episodes. Alan Jackson Ministries is working hard to get biblical truth back into our culture. You can find out more about Pastor Alan and the [e-mail] that is AlanJackson.com again. That is AlanJackson.com joining us now. Super excited for this conversation. Edward Kovalik, who is the chairman and CEO of the Prayer Operating Group and we've been talking about his stuff for a while. It's oilfacts.com Edward, great to see you. So much to discuss. Thank you for joining the program. You are an energy truth teller. First, let's just talk geopolitical and then we'll go a little bit more specific. What are the stakes of America and Russia meeting today? Russia being one of the biggest producers of petroleum on the planet? Please. Edward, welcome to the program and walk us through the geopolitical stakes of what's happening today.

[B]

First of all, Charlie, it's great to be with you. I'm a huge fan and what you do is just so, so important. If anyone is not aware of this, oil, fossil fuels basically drive the entire global economy and as a result drive geopolitics. Russia is really a petro state and extractive state whose primary line of business is producing oil and minerals and essentially an influential member of opec. So to President Trump's credit, he's been really eagle eyed on keeping oil prices low to manage real costs for everyday Americans. And that's why I think you've seen the White House be a little bit light footed, light handed on really exerting maximum pressure on Russia. So it'll be interesting to see what happens with respect to these negotiations and if President Trump really uses that final trump card, so to speak, against Russia geopolitically with respect to Ukraine, because President Trump has really hesitated up until now to do that.

[A]

Has global demand for fossil fuels or petroleum gone up or down in the last five years?

[B]

So just to set the record straight, demand for energy and specifically fossil fuels has gone up every year since the beginning of the implementation of fossil fuels. If you go back to the early 20th century and look at the world pre fossil fuels up till today, you'll see pretty much a straight line up into the right linearly with demand growth every year, the only stutters in that growth have been the 0708 credit crisis. And then we saw demand bounce right back thereafter. And then we saw another pause in demand growth during COVID when we were all forced to stay in our homes for over a year. And then you saw demand growth come right back. And so that's really no mystery since even with all the talk about renewable energy, as it's called, replacing fossil fuels, fossil fuels still account for 60% of electricity generation in this country, a greater share in most other countries, and really are part of everything that we use in our daily lives. Everything that surrounds us in our daily lives is made from fossil fuels.

[A]

Yeah. And so I asked for a reason, because we were told 10 years ago that there's gonna be a green energy push and that we're gonna divest ourselves from fossil fuels. How's that working? We were told that we had peak oil, that we're gonna have solar panels and windmills, and it was this very utopian vision. What's the truth?

[B]

Well, the truth is that there is no energy transition. There's only energy addition. Nearly half the world is still energy poor and consume about the amount of energy that your refrigerator does on a per capita basis for an entire family. Most of the world is trying to pull themselves out of energy starvation in that same period of time. As we've seen demand for growth for oil rather grow linearly since the early 1900s, we've also seen people live a lot longer as a result of all the things that fossil fuels have enabled. We've also seen tremendous prosperity and record numbers of people coming out of poverty. I think global poverty is now down from about 42% in 1980 to less than 10% today. This whole idea that we can transition from fossil fuels to solar and wind for our primary source of energy is really just foolish and a lie because solar and wind are extremely inefficient, extremely low energy dense, and completely uneconomic. And were it not for extreme government subsidies up to date, we probably see much less solar and wind actually developed around the world.

[A]

And you can learn more about [e-mail] I'm actually on the website right now.

[B]

You can.

[A]

It's oilfacts.com and you have this amazing thing, 10 Energy Truths in the Age of AI. So there have been several predictions made by the kind of climate core. Would you say this is a decivilizational movement, the environmentalist? Is that the undercurrent. Is that the reason they have such gusto?

[B]

Absolutely. If you just go through a logical progression of facts here. Cutting off energy supply to create energy scarcity is a path towards starvation, not towards promoting human flourishing. That's really the only logical outcome, particularly in a time where we're seeing real stress in the west on electrical grids as a result of AI driven data center growth that's projected to double between now and 2030. Really, on a grid in this country that dates back on average to the 1970s. It's really arcane and needs a tremendous amount of investment. With this aging grid, limited distribution capability, AI data centers are going to hog all incremental power supplied to the grid, which is really going to leave Americans left out in the cold and could lead to a scenario where we see energy rationing in this country, which again leads to poverty. Because we know for a fact that energy, well, access to abundant and affordable energy is the number one variable correlated to both human longevity and prosperity.

[A]

Yeah. And so the decivilization component is incredibly important. Everyone could check it [e-mail] but. So we are all marveling at artificial intelligence. We're marveling at what it can do. I mean, some of us are a little terrified, to be honest. But connect the dots. Why does energy and fossil fuels, why is that a key ingredient with the AI revolution? You can't have one without the other.

[B]

Well, for one, it's as simple as AI data centers use a tremendous amount of power. Training one single AI model uses as much energy as electricity. We need to supply 100 homes in a year. It's just a staggering amount of electrical demand. This whole lie, which is simply what it is, that climate change is induced by the use of fossil fuels. And as a result, we need to curb fossil fuel use and thereby create scarcity. And energy in general goes against the whole narrative of empowering our society with AI, because AI is going to require every ounce of electrons we could possibly spare to power these data centers. So the sad irony is that people have been led to believe this lie, because I think people genuinely want to be virtuous. They want to do right, they want to do good by the environment. They want to do good, good to each other. I believe in the human spirit. And that human spirit has been turned against itself, ironically, by buying into this lie, because buying into it will lead to, you know, human poverty and really worse outcomes.

[A]

Yeah. And so let's talk about some of those lies, and in particular one of them, they will say that the constant production of fossil fuels is bad for the environment. You touched on that what is the truth here? There was that ridiculous movie, Frack Nation, I think that's what it was called. And it was like, oh, my drinking water now has petroleum in it. What is the truth here?

[B]

So as you recall, they started by calling it global warming. They rebranded it to be climate change. But ironically, far more people have died in history because of extreme cold, an extreme heat. Now that we have a scientifically honest administration in the White House and Chris Wright is really doing yeoman's job as Energy Secretary to expose real science behind climate. There is no proven correlation between fossil fuel use and climate change. There's actually no correlation between global CO2 and climate change when looking back at climate for 200 million years. So I think that historically you've had groups that have used bad science, very small data sets, really bad sampling to make a political point because it sure as heck is not a scientific point.

[A]

Yeah. So can you just build that out really quick, tell us more about the evidence we have for the last 200 million years. How do we know that what you just said? Because that's a contention that's thrown at me all the time on college campuses.

[B]

Well, we have great geological data that is exemplifying the nature of the atmosphere for that period of time. And you know, in times of high CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, the planet's gone through sort of a tropicalization period and we're kind of seeing that now, which leads to more abundant food supply, actually a greening of the planet. And so all of this is evidenced in the geologic history. It's really pretty indisputable.

[A]

It's hard to believe it was even possible, but the Democrat run states are now more pro abortion than ever and will only get worse unless you join me standing for life. This is Charlie Kirk and we're saving babies right now with preborn. Ultrasounds save lives. That's why Preborn gives free ultrasounds to girls and women. It's the truth they truly deserve and it doubles the chance that she'll choose life. $140 gives five mothers a free ultrasound and saves babies. $280 can save 10 babies. And just $28 a month can save a baby a month for less than a dollar a day. And a $15,000 gift will provide an ultrasound machine that will save lives for years to come. Ultrasounds save lives. It's the truth they truly deserve and it doubles the chance that she'll choose life. Whether you want to save one baby or five or hundreds, that opportunity is just a phone call or click away. Call 833-850-2229 or click on the preborn banner at charliekirk.com that's 833-850-2229 or click on the pre born banner at charliekirk.Com Continuing with us is Edward Kovalik from oilfacts.com Edward, I want to take a step back here and just say so you're a veteran of the oil industry. You started your oil business, Perry Operating Company, which is traded on the NASDAQ during Joe Biden. How has running your oil business been different under President Trump versus Joe Biden?

[B]

Well, you know, going back to when we started the company, everybody told us that we were crazy because we weren't going to need any more fossil fuels by 2030. So I was an absolute idiot for starting the company in Biden's America. Fast forward to today and I think we've got a much more sober, true attitude coming out of the White House. We'd like to see some real policy changes as an industry to promote American energy over OPEC oil because we are the largest manufacturing industry in the United States in terms of value. We employ over 10 million Americans. A lot of blue collar workers, mostly blue collar workers earning 84% above private sector wages. So you know, we're, we're big fans of this administration telling the truth about oil. But we need some help as an industry to really promote production in this country.

[A]

Yeah. So what does that look like? What would the ideal portfolio or sequencing of decisions look like?

[B]

Good question. You know, I think that there's a lot that the administration can do with respect to federal lands and federal leasing. Where we are in Colorado, for instance, there's significant amount of federal land. Yeah. And offshore and in Alaska. So that together with EPA policy on ozone and emissions, that could really use a lot of work. And I think they're, you know, working on it. But we are an impatient bunch and we'd love to see it all happen a little faster.

[A]

Yeah. So this pro energy agenda is incredibly important. How much does this differentiate state by state? Colorado's a nightmare for a lot of different ways. The environmentalists have tried to get rid of exploration on the western slope. I don't know if they were successful, but they've tried for a long time. And what can the federal government do in addition? Not just executive orders but, but to increase production. But, but do you guys in your business, do you want more production? Because wouldn't that also drive down the price? So how do you reconcile that? More exploration, more Production with the price of oil, because if it goes down too low, then there's no incentive for you guys to keep exploring.

[B]

Well, it's a really interesting topic because, you know, as much as President Trump would like lower oil prices, the reality is, is that oil prices are really at a historic low when really adjusted for inflation. So if you factor in the shale boom, that's allowed us to become producers of 13 million barrels a day or so of energy that was driven at really higher prices to today, there's been about $20 of inflation built into oil prices. So oil near 60 bucks is really oil near 40 bucks going back 20 years. So that's a really important thing to understand. The other really important thing to understand is that most of the oil produced in this country is now shale. And shale is not what you imagine on television where we drill a well and you see a gusher of oil and you walk away for 30 years and you keep producing that oil at the same rate. Shale is really a resource of very high decline. So. So we produce about 60% of the reserves from a shale well in the first three years of production with a hyperbolic decline. So just the effort to maintain production flat is a real huge challenge in the United States. And, you know, we're quickly running out of economic drilling locations to do that at these types of prices. So the idea that we can really create a lasting tenable American energy independence for the next 50 years at $60 or less, oil is really not correct. So we're really in a battle with opec. And OPEC still holds a lot of cards around total global production. But, you know, I and everyone in this industry have been trying to predict oil prices for as long as I can remember. And the one thing I know for a fact is we're always wrong. We've always been wrong in predicting. But economics, as you point out, have a way to right production. Low oil prices create high oil prices because people, you know, stop producing as much oil.

[A]

Edward Kovalik, thank you so much. Oilfacts.com we need to dominate the world with energy. We should be drilling more, we should be exporting more, and we should be exploring more. If we want to dominate the AI space and we have to refute all these lies, that's why I want people to check out oilfacts.com the global warming, environmental, you know, pollutes or drinking water. It's all a bunch of BS. Oilfacts.com Edward, thank you so much.

[B]

Thanks for having me on, Charlie.

[A]

Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us as always. Freedomarliekirk.com thanks so much for listening and God bless us.

[B]

For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk. Com.