So far, the deniers keep talking about how the science is overwhelmingly in their favor and climate change advocates are ignoring the science.
Fine. So, I made a venue for them to prove their claims, the $10,000 Global Warming Skeptic Challenge and the $1000 Scientific Evidence Challenge. I am disappointed, but certainly not surprised, that there have been no challenges in either case. Why do you think that is?
The deniers, I am sure, are saying the reason they don't submit anything is because I'm the sole judge. Yes, that is a true statement, but its my money. However, I also said I will post any challenge and I will show why the challenge does not meed the standards, in the case it doesn't. What this means is that I am putting my credibility on the line. If someone makes a valid challenge and I dismiss it, it will be there for the entire world to see.
Besides, if I am giving a critique, all a denier has to do is take that critique, address my criticisms and submit it again. There is no entry fee and you can keep submitting for as long as you like - or win, if that happens to be the case.
Someone criticized me with the statement that I wouldn't enter a challenge with those terms. In fact, I did just that. I submitted an entry for the Junk Science Ultimate Global Warming Challenge. Junk Science (what an appropriate name for an organization that deniers global warming and says DDT is harmless for the environment) had their challenge in 2007-2008. They promised a $500,000 award to anyone that could prove global warming is real and is harmful. He also charged $15 to make a submission.
Oh, by the way, he was the sole judge.
I made my submission, but not because I thought there was ever any chance he would admit his mistake and award the money. I am very suspicious that he never had the money anyway. I did it to illustrate the point that he had no credibility. He cannot make a valid claim that no one could do it. By the way, he just said my entry didn't succeed, he never gave any reason for his decision. But, we know his reason, he never intended to give the money away to anyone.
No, the real reason no one has taken the challenge is because they can't. There is no scientific evidence supporting the claims of the deniers that man-made global warming isn't real. The science is overwhelming. It is not possible to prove, via the scientific method, that it isn't real. And, I stand by my statement that there isn't even any scientific evidence at all to support the deniers.
Their silence says everything that needs to be said. I know it, they know it and now you know it.
Or maybe people just have no idea how to submit their findings to you. Am I supposed to just comment it somewhere on your blog? Try and track down your e-mail? Sign up to be spied on further by joining Google Plus? I would very much like to have a logical argument with you but I do not know which medium will be regarded as a proper submission.
ReplyDeleteSubmit it here:
Deletehttp://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/p/1000-global-warming-skeptic-challenge.html
todo mundo está cansado de saber que o aquecimento global é coisa de alienígenas......aliens, meu caro. aliens.
ReplyDeleteeveryone is tired of knowing that global warming is something alien aliens ......, my dear. aliens.
ReplyDeleteI have proof Can I email you my Proof. I use the data that supports global warming and show that we produce an insignificant volume of greenhouse gas. Unless the published numbers are underestimated.
ReplyDeleteSubmit it here:
Deletehttp://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/p/1000-global-warming-skeptic-challenge.html
You're obviously a "Dem wit". I bet you believe in neo-Darwinism, too. Do you think Guam might capsize like some of your Democratic brethren?
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't waste my time trying to convince a "prog" of anything. Haven't you imbeciles proclaimed the debate on global warming as closed? Or the debate on climate change? Or the debate on climate disruption? Whatever you're calling it this week.
Take your $10,000 and invent yourself a chastity belt for your brain. It's all screwed up, now. But, we can hope that stopping the penetration of further progressive mysticism might give it time to mend.
I am most certainly not a Democrat (although I'm not a Republican, either). You did manage to show a big part of the problem, though. You automatically assumed that because I follow the science that I must be a Democrat. You automatically assigned a political affiliation to my understanding of science, even though you know nothing about me. It is all about the political party for you, not about the science. If Obama came out tomorrow as a denier you would be an advocate of man made global warming before dinner time.
DeleteIt has been my experience that "birds of a feather flock together". You may not call yourself a Democrat, but I'd skip dinner time for a week if you're not a progressive. If Obama came out tomorrow as a denier, it would be the first time in his presidency that he would most likely be right about something. I say "most likely" because the science isn't settled on manmade climate change no matter how many times Al Gore, the IPCC, NASA and NOAA may say it is. True science always questions its beliefs.
DeleteLet's assume you and Obama are right about Man dangerously disrupting the climate through the emission of CO2. Will more people suffer from the resulting climactic changes or will more people suffer from a federal government making the American economy less productive and less competitive in the world?
Progressives would assure an American dystopia on the insignificantly small chance that Man is having a calamitous effect on the world's climate.
Not even a progressive. My family finds it hilarious every time one of you twits jumps to the conclusion I'm a liberal. It is a typical denier thing to do. Make a decision based on what you want instead of the facts.
DeleteShow me any evidence that addressing climate change will hurt the economy. That's what they said about the computer revolution, too. Look how that turned out. Made more jobs and created more GDP than anything since the start of the industrial revolution. Addressing climate change will do the same.
What you're saying is you don't believe in climate change because someone told you it will hurt the economy. Isn't that what I have been saying, deniers reject science because it isn't what they want to hear?
I knew you would say my contention that fighting climate change will cause harm to the economy was a "straw man" argument. And I don't know any "they" who said computer automation was going to have a negative impact on American business. I do know a "he" who said ATMs were partly responsible for the high unemployment rate: Barack Obama.
DeleteThe computer revolution was a free-market driven enterprise, not a government driven enterprise. If the federal government had been regulating the development of the computer, we'd all be using a desktop abacus with the beads moving on vertical columns.
How many times does history have to demonstrate that a centralized, government-managed economy does not work? You, Obama, and the UN say, "At least one more time."
Tell me this, please, do you think making ethanol from corn is a good thing? Do you believe windmill farms are more cost-effective at producing electricity than coal? Did spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on Solyndra reap any benefits for the economy, as a whole?
And one more question, please. Are you willing to stand before your Creator and tell Him, Her, or any of the other 50 genders of Facebook that you enthusiastically supported turning food into fuel in a starving world when the Creator placed abundant energy right under your feet, and when you knew that Michael Mann's "hockey stick" was a fabrication, and that NASA and NOAA altered temperature data from the 1930s, and that 65 million years ago lush vegetation grew in Northern Alaska AND Alaska was even farther North than it is today, and that dissenting voices to climate change were squelched and treated as heretics?
Were do I submit mine. I accept your challenge.
ReplyDeletehttp://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/p/1000-global-warming-skeptic-challenge.html
DeleteCan you scientifically prove you will pay 10k$ to the person who proves that man-made global climate change is not occurring?
ReplyDeleteI seriously doubt that.
I might, but it isn't a scientific question.
Delete