So, my two challenges to the deniers has been getting a lot of attention lately and the comments and accusations are really flying. I think it would be easier to make a posting about this instead of addressing each one over and over.
The two challenges are in response to deniers claiming that man made global warming is not real and that the science to support them is conclusive. My challenge to them is to show their claims are true. That is all it is.
There have been complaints by deniers that this is not a fair challenge. Why not? Deniers are the ones that made the claim, why is it unfair to make them stand by their own words. If they think it is unfair to hold them to their own claims, then stop making the claims.
Some have tried to change the challenge by arguing semantics, saying that I have not defined the parameters clearly. The parameters are clear - put up or shut up. If they think that the parameters of their claims are not clear, then stop making the claims.
Some have objected that I treat them with harsh words. That is true, but doesn't change the nature of the challenge. You guys have made the statements, not me. Why is your inability to produce the fault of what I think of you? The fact that you lie to the public like that with no ability to produce is why I say harsh things about you (and think much harsher things that I keep to myself). If you don't like being treated harshly, then back up what you say with some proof.
Some have even gone so far as to claim that no one has ever denied that man made global warming is not real. I swear, I didn't make that last statement up. This is such a brazen lie that I wonder if the people saying this have lost touch with reality. Seriously, I wonder if they have lost touch with the real world. One question to those people, if deniers have never said man made global warming is not real, then just what have you guys been saying all this time? There is a long record of your statements about how global warming is a fraud, etc. Once again, if you don't like being held accountable for what you say, stop saying it.
Some have said the challenge should be to the scientists to prove their claims. Scientists, unlike the deniers, have to prove their statements every step of the way and have to do it every day. All of their work is submitted to refereed journals for review before it can become part of the scientific literature. After publication, their work is still examined and reexamined over and over. That is part of the scientific process - it has to be reproducible by other people. So, I don't need to issue a challenge to the scientists because they already have a challenge much more rigorous than anything I could issue. The deniers should be held to the same level of accountability, but they aren't. They are getting off very easy with my challenge.
So, I will do some of your work for you and provide you with a couple of ways to disprove AGW. It surprises me that I have to do this because the deniers just go on and on about how the science doesn't support man made global warming. You really would think they could figure out a proof all on their own.
The first comes from an anonymous reader that made a comment:
The basic tenets of AGW are these two IPCC conclusions:Option #2:
It is extremely likely (95-100%) that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.
Climate sensitivity is likely in the range 1.5°C to 4.5°C and extremely unlikely (95-100%) less than 1°C.
So if someone was able to scientifically disprove these two extremely likely / unlikely statements, then that should suffice. That said, the climate debate has shifted a bit over the past decades I’ve following it into at least “skeptics” grudgingly accepting (1) that the planet is actually warming and (2) the physics behind sensitivity excluding feedbacks being 1.1°C.
Deniers love claiming that previous cycles in the climate prove that the current warming cycle is nothing more than a naturally occurring warming cycle (of course, you have to concede that it is warming in order to make this claim). The problem is that they never provide any proof, or even evidence, that there is any connection between the current warming cycle and naturally occurring cycles.
Proof that today's warming cycle is a naturally occurring event would satisfy the challenge.
So, there you go. I set the challenge up to favor the deniers and have now even produced two separate ways they can win.
And, yet, THE DENIERS STILL CAN'T PRODUCE.
That is part of the problem. They are told to put or shut up and THEY DON'T DO EITHER ONE! Come on guys! Do one or the other!
They try to change the subject on the challenge. I have been told I should be the one to prove my stand. Two comments on that. First, the challenge is to the deniers, not to me. If they don't like the challenge, then stop making the statements. Second, I DID! That is what my book is all about! I made a claim about the validity of man made global warming and I provided a proof to back up my claim. If they really want to see me prove the validity of man made global warming they only need to buy my book.
Until then, the challenge remains and it will remain unchanged. Deniers say man made global warming is false and it is easy to prove it. SO DO IT!
I'm still waiting. And, so is the rest of the world.
You know why you guys haven't done it yet? Because you are frauds, liars and deceivers! You make statements to the public because you know you can say anything you want without being held accountable. The challenge remains - if is is so easy, why can't you do it?
Of course, we all know exactly why.
The lack of proof from you guys is all I need to prove my point.