I'll save you some time
Basically he's saying we can do more good spending the money on the third world than trying to fix climate change. Very nieve and short sighted. Just look at what's happening now in the summer of 2012 with the drought in the US. We provide grain to much of the third world. Corn prices have hit a record high and the harvest hasn't really started yet. We aren't going to have the excesses we normally have to ship overseas. Now let's say this is a normal year in the near future, not an extreme idea if global warming is right and he claims it is correct and we are the cause. Suddenly in a good year we don't have much excess and in a bad year we have shortages here at home. The droughts and warming could actually be worse I'm just using this as an example of something we are already seeing and I'm not counting things like storm damage which is another issue. Now guess which area is hardest hit by global warming? Africa. They are projected to have drastically worse droughts than here. Now by ignoring global warming and throwing all the money into foreign aid as he suggests are we helping or hurting?
He's short sighted because he likes to fantasize about all the good we can do if we divert resources but he ignores the fact that the real warming hasn't even started and already we are having problems. His stance is essentially don't insulate your house to cut down on energy use send that money to third world countries. What he's saying has nothing to do with the environment it's a personal agenda and he's clouding the issue.