Physicist Offers $10,000 to Anyone Who Can Disprove Global Warming

i've already provided one name, let's cut to the finish

do you think keating is the only agw scientist that doesn't get public funding?

 

I see you haven't responded to my post about global warming believers using computers and keyboards made from big oil byproducts.

If you really want to put your brain where your mouth is, you'll toss your posting device into the nearest burn pile.

 

ok, i'll respond, but i don't know you, so first let me ask

are for a limited government, lower taxes and less public spending?

 

Sorry. That's not how it works. My beliefs have absolutely ZERO to do with your actions.

 

i guess you're out of luck, it's too bad you're scared to say what you think

 

Okay, nitwits, I will pay $1,000 of my own money to anyone who can prove to my satisfaction that there is no Easter Bunny. I would offer $10,000 but I get no government money. How about proving there is no god or no Tooth Fairy?

 

lol. Sure. Scared.

Your silly little attempt at deflection will work for other like-minded people. It won't work with those with active brains.

It's totally amazing at how utterly dumb and predictable liberals are.

 

why else wouldn't you answer?

your assertion is quite imbecilic

uh oh, somebody on the internet says people that trust science should stop using computers, because he thinks big oil has something to do with it

that's the epitome of foolishness

what a joke, you have no idea what you're talking about

 

I see you haven't yet given up your oil byproduct products.


Here...let me remind you what you said:

Originally Posted by dujac

what a joke, the few scientist that are paid by big oil to deny science, aren't credible



Silly. And laughable. As noted, all talk, no action.

 

stop making up fairy tales and get a grip on reality

that's exactly right, because big oil is paying them to deny reality


i'd show you the evidence supporting my statement, but you're afraid to look at it

so why should i bother, i know what you've been coached to say

 

You speak for "most scientists" now?

 

no, i'm relating what they say, as opposed to the few that say whatever big oil wants them to say

it's nothing new, remember when big tobacco said smoking didn't cause cancer? it's a similar concept

 

Predictions projections is double speek a projection is a prediction made with a greater error range and less confidence. After we passed the 15 year mark of no warming the projections were outside of their error range.

 

the projection paradigm is a better way of forming more accurate models

 

Based on what?

 

reading what they say

 

So you've read what "most scientists" have said? Is that what you're saying?

 

no, have you?

 

He is correct, oh! There are a few where the link is difficult to trace but the majority speaking out against global warming are receiving money from big oil - look at Fred Singer - now THERE is a "scientists" who will sell his soul for profit

 

How can anyone "disprove" something that hasn't been proven in the first place? Computer models aren't proof of anything.

 

It's the same problem atheists have proving there is no God. One has to pretend to know everything to make such a declaration. Impossible to take their claims seriously... about anything.

 

That is just another warmist meme. There are a number of scientists that have contributed to the IPCC that just because they question some of the science, they are labeled denialists. Some even question other so called denialists work such as the recent Goddard questioning the errors in the land temperature records. Two 'so called' denialists jumped in to point out his math errors, Watts and Zeke Hausfather wrote a number of posts about them. Judith Curry was asked by Politifact to review Goddard's work but she had other things to do at the time and at a later date, started to review all the writings along with the data and lo and behold, after Paul Homewood reviewed a couple of stations data there is a problem with the data being estimated too high by as much as 1.35C.

Massive Temperature Adjustments At Luling, Texas

NOAA is supposed to issue a statement next week sometime and possibly an adjustment.

This is called the technical blogosphere where actual scientists review and critique the data.

BTW, there is a new model out that hind casts much better than the CO2 model and is predicting cooling the next few decades. That doesn't make it correct but like the CO2 model where observations are now outside of all predictions and cannot hind cast very well, actual temperatures are used to check against the models and when the models are wrong, like the CO2 models, the idea is to go back to the drawing board to find out the problem.

The new model suggests cooling could start from 2015 to 2024 depending on the length of the delay.



http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/big-news-viii-new-solar-model-predicts-imminent-global-cooling/

 

Projection is the oposite of more accurate. A projection means we dont have a very solid understanding of the present state or the futute state. A projection is a fundamental admission of greater potential error and less accuracy than a prediction it is the exact opposite of " more accurate."

 

Why not just answer the question instead of making a feeble attempt to deflect by tossing the question back to the asker?

You're the one making foolish statements. It's up to YOU, not someone else, to prove your nonsense.

Lord, I get tired of liberals who can't stay focused.

 

that's a good idea, here it is again: are you for limited government, lower taxes and less public spending?

you answer and then i'll answer, see how that works or not, depending on your sense of fair play

really, you don't understand how scientific theories can be disproven?