For a Quick 10K – Prove Climate Change is Not Real!

June 26, 2014

And Cenk (above) throws in another 10 K. Shoot. That’s real money.

Dialogues on Global Warming:

I have heard global warming skeptics make all sorts of statements about how the science doesn’t support claims of man-made climate change. I have found all of those statements to be empty and without any kind of supporting evidence. I have, in turn, stated that it is not possible for the skeptics to prove their claims. And, I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.

I am announcing the start of the $10,000 Global Warming Skeptic Challenge. The rules are easy:

1. I will award $10,000 of my own money to anyone that can prove, via the scientific method, that man-made global climate change is not occurring;

2. There is no entry fee;

3. You must be 18 years old or older to enter;

4. Entries do not have to be original, they only need to be first;

5. I am the final judge of all entries but will provide my comments on why any entry fails to prove the point.
That’s it! I know you are not going to get rich with $10,000. But, tell me, wouldn’t you like to have a spare $10,000? After all, the skeptics all claim it is a simple matter, and it doesn’t even have to be original. If it is so easy, just cut and paste the proof from somewhere. Provide the scientific evidence and prove your point and the $10,000 is yours!

This is no joke. If someone can provide a proof that I can’t refute, using scientific evidence, then I will write them a check.

But, I am sure I will never have to because it can’t be proven. The scientific evidence for global warming is overwhelming and no one can prove otherwise.

Any takers?

 

 

Advertisements

50 Responses to “For a Quick 10K – Prove Climate Change is Not Real!”

  1. mbe11 Says:

    I assume you think man is changing the climate by emitting CO2 and those rising CO2 levels are warming the world?

    The Mauno loa study of CO2 levels has been done since 1959. It shows zero correlation with climate change.

    The current IPCC report admits the world has not warmed in 16 years.

    CO2 levels rose a lot in those 16 years.

    the ice core studies studied climate and CO2 levels over a period of 800000 years. In all that time CO2 level changes never caused a climate change. It is my understanding the climate changed a lot in that time.

    The medievil warm period peaked about 900-1000 AD. Several temperature reconstructions varify that as do the viking which settled Greenland during that period after they discovered the place.

    The world cooled off after that period reaching a low around 1625. The world has been warming off and on ever since. You can say the world has been warmer every year on average for 400 years. That neglects the hiatus in warming like the one from 1940 to 1980 or the one after 1998 (see IPCC report). The giss data set is used by both IPCC, NASA, NOAA and a whole bunch of others to look up the temperature since 1880 so it has a lot of supporters that is where the hiatus numbers come from.

    I believe you need to rethink your conclusion. i suggest stop reading the talking heads blah and look at the actual studies pro and con.

    • greenman3610 Says:

      you, my friend, could win yourself 10 grand. easy!


      • Hey Greenman, that’s not fair. I’m entitled to at least half that money. My CO2 fire extinguisher research is just as valid as anything that mbe11 came up with.

        By the way, I’d like to interest you in a product my company is marketing:

        You might want to bring some of that to Greenland with you on your upcoming trip.

    • andrewfez Says:

      =It is my understanding the climate changed a lot in that time.=

      How do you know that?


      • andrew- A lot. Its a scientific term. Its very exact. It means exactly whatever he thinks a lot means. Now for Humpty Dumpty……

        • andrewfez Says:

          Ha! My point was he’s quite willing to accept scientific inferences with regard to anything that doesn’t, in his mind, directly illuminate AGW.

          It’s almost like having complete faith in mathematics, up until that point when one owes a lot of money to the IRS, then spending one’s time trying to fault the mathematics for their situation. All those times before, when taxes were paid properly, the math worked fine. Now the IRS is after ya: maybe 2+2 really equals 3, instead of 4.

    • MorinMoss Says:

      Before you start reciting the timeworn “no warming since 1998” mantra, you should read Tamino’s analysis of the post 1998 temperature data sets.

      https://tamino.wordpress.com/2014/01/30/global-temperature-the-post-1998-surprise/


      • Actually, if you seriously cherry pick to find the first recent trend that shows cooling by selecting 2001 to 2013 (13 years) and compare those to a high warming trend that only goes from 1979 to 2000 (as that would include 1998 El Nino year) – you still get 8 temperature points above the trend line as I show here:

        If I had based the trend on all points up to 2013, even more points would be above as Tamino shows perfectly in your link.

        So the “no warming-since” nonsense is just ridiculous.

        • MorinMoss Says:

          Nice one. You should post that at Tamino’s.

          The local fruit stores & groceries have recently had cherries on sale; perhaps some of our denier friends would appreciate a nice gift basket.

    • rayduray Says:

      Sadly, you’re an idiot.

      Re: “The medievil warm period peaked about 900-1000 AD”

      Well there is a regional medieval warm period. It lasted from 950 CE to 1250 CE in one small region of the planet. It peaked a century later than your mythological medievil(sp?) warm period.

      You might consider two paths to enlightenment. English, as a written language is something you are sorely incompetent at. And climate seems to be something you also do not understand.

      Other than that, thanks for your “contribution”.


    • Are there pink fluffy unicorns in your world and cotton candy clouds? It surely sounds wonderful, how do I get there? Oh I forgot, it needs a lobotomy first…


  2. While I got a CO2 fire extinguisher hanging on the wall in my kitchen. I just went over there right now and picked it up – doesn’t feel even the least bit warm. If CO2 it the Earth’s atmosphere is causing the planet to burn up, how come my fire extinguisher ain’t hot?

    Furthermore, a few years ago I used a CO2 fire extinguisher to put out a car fire. So tell me, if fires are hot and CO2 makes everything hot, how come spraying CO2 on the fire puts it out? Hah, bet you can’t answer that one!

    Fact is, CO2 makes everything cooler. The more CO2 we put in the atmosphere, the cooler the Earth gets. The only reason we haven’t had a new ice age is because of them solar panels. They soak up sunshine, making the Earth warmer. Those greenie environwackos with their solar panels would have set the planet on fire by now if it weren’t for Godly clean coal.

    Of course, them so-called “scientists” didn’t even think of this. That’s because they don’t know nuttin’. What a bunch of maroons!

    I’ll be sending you my banking details shortly so you can wire the $10,000 to me.


  3. Greenman, human can change the climate for worse and is capable to improve the climate for better: cut the Amazon forest – will turn into Sahara = bring water to Sahara, will improve the climate, that’s climate. water controls climate, not CO2

    On the other hand ”Global” warming doesn’t exist, I will not take your money; but can prove to you, beyond any reasonable doubt – be a good sport and don’t trash my comment, don’t be scared from the truth like the phony ”Skeptics” are: http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com/climate/

    • jpcowdrey Says:

      Wow! I took a glance at stefan’s website.

      No, he will not be taking anyone’s money.


    • jpcowdrey that’s the word ”glance” I will use it in my book. Some people are so scared from ”real” proofs – they ”glance” and run away…

      I have all the proof ”beyond any reasonable doubt” that is no ”GLOBAL” warming BUT, your greenman is skilfully challenging: ”to prove that is no climate change” nobody can prove that, because climate is in constant change

      Let me tell you something: CO2 doesn’t affect the climate, otherwise would have being same climate in Brazil as in Sahara; because on both places is same amount of CO2. B] water changes / controls the climate.
      If you don’t know what’s ”good climate” ask the trees – one oak-tree has more knowledge about the climate than ALL the Warmist & Skeptics followers

      I have proven that is NO GLOBAL warming – is good for you to learn and relax your nerves, my blog proves that; but don’t only ”glance”

      • MorinMoss Says:

        Dude, give up already, okay?

        The SOUTHERN edge of the Sahara Desert is HUNDREDS of miles NORTH of the Equator.

        There’s only a small percentage of the bulk of Brazil that is near or slightly north of 0 deg N.

        It’s much more complex than simple location but your stupidly facile argument fails right out of the gate.

        Or is Equatorial Denial part of your Climactic Philosophy, too?


      • MorinMoss Says: ”Dude, give up already, okay?”

        Hi Morin; to correct you: ”there are large parts of Sahara and Brazil on the SAME latitude – same distance from the equator and polar cap – but completely different climates. Oak tree is very knowledgeable – you can learn a lot from it about climate – then you will not confuse normal climatic changes with the phony GLOBAL warming
        Cheers!

        • MorinMoss Says:

          Seriously?
          The kindest thing I can think to say about you is that you’re an idiot & a liar.
          I don’t think there’s a map of the world big enough to roll up and beat some sense into your thick skull.

          But, I’ll give it a shot. Thank me later.

          There is NO part of the Sahara that yet reaches the equator and NO part of Brazil on the same latitude.

          You’re incapable of distinguishing the semi-arid region known as the Sahel from the Sahara desert. Read this s…l….o….w….l….y: They…. are…..not…..the….same.

          Got it? Let’s move on.

          Applying your reasoning, Oak Tree Wisdom & previous statements, here’s an easy proof of CO2 & global warming:

          Mexico, nearly all of Texas and a good chunk of the US Southwest falls with the latitudes of the upper Sahara – and these places are also famously hot & dry.

          Ergo, CO2 causes climate change. Congratulations.


      • MorinMoss Says: ”The SOUTHERN edge of the Sahara Desert is HUNDREDS of miles NORTH of the Equator”

        Morin, no matter if is north, or south of the equator; as long as they are on SAME latitude.

        Morin, now I leave very close, south of the equator where Australia is most desert, but on that ”same” latitude, north of the equator/ is SAME temp, same CO2, but in Burma, Vietnam is beautiful rainforest.

        So find on the world map; where part of Brazil and Sahara are on the SAME latitude – same distance from the equator; one is north, the other south of the equator, that doesn’t matter, both places get same sunshine – see and compare the quality of vegetation – you can learn something useful, not to make fool of yourself about simple things like that…

        To make it even simpler for you: on ”same” latitude, where Australia is desert and DRY rivers, in Brazil the tributaries of Amazon are bringing plenty water and have beautiful vegetation – is it simple enough for you to understand now?
        Cheers!

        • MorinMoss Says:

          Your entire post has just revealed that you’re a stupid crackpot.
          Go away, this village has enough idiots dumbing down the conversation.


        • Morin,
          you are proving that you suffer from ”Truth-Phobia” sorry to hear that; the only way to heal yourself is: to face the truth and reality, you can chase me, but you cannot run away from the truth – it will only give you insomnia…

          My blog has all the proofs, because I don’t affiliate to any ideology – only to real proof. Hope you will get better…


      • MorinMoss,
        listen very carefully, if you want to learn the things incorrectly: reason Texas, Mexico are dry is because: the ”Gulf Stream” is stilling the surface water from the Mexican gulf, as soon as it warms up and is taking it to the Mediterranean and England as on a conveyor belt. No time for that warmwater to produce enough water vapor – which would have gone west

        If you can close the straight of Gibraltar -> most of Texas and mexico would have become rainforest again, as they were before Gibraltar was opened!!!

        Morin, if you want to know anything, just ask, you don’t have to be abusive, to prove your ignorance

        • MorinMoss Says:

          Don’t project your ignorance here.
          There are many, many sites who’ll gladly indulge your insanity.

        • MorinMoss Says:

          Wait a sec? You think the strait of Gibraltar is the linchpin?

          Now I know you are a troll; no one could be that stupid, especially considering the size and direction of the currents that make up the North Atlantic Gyre.


  4. I’m willing to contribute. Let’s get a fund up to a million dollars. I wonder if the press will cover it?

    • MorinMoss Says:

      What would the score be for Eschenbach, Tisdale, Monckton or any of The Usual Suspects over at Willard Watt’s Weather World?


  5. Only $10,000?

    I’ll make it $10,000,000,000,000. In fact, you can make it any number you like, no-one can claim something that can’t be claimed.


  6. Not the people on the net Warmist & Skeptics; but if somebody ask those questions people on the street – they would have known the answers, without any ”doubt” without any reservation:

    Q: do you know that the earth has oxygen& nitrogen, lots of it?
    Q: do you know that they expand when warmed and shrink when cooled, ’instantly”?
    Q: do you know that: where the troposphere expands up; there is -90C, very, very cold?
    Today Warmist& Skeptics don’t know that the earth has oxygen &nitrogen – that’s why they are comparing the earth with the moon and Venus…?
    Let me tell you the ”PRECISION” the earth’s ‘’TEMPERATURE SELF ADJUSTING MECHANISM” has:

    Example: when you light a cigarette – it produces heat for the one cubic inch around where is burning – that cubic inch of air expands and becomes two inches by volume – the extra cubic inch doesn’t go in the yard, because is already air there – instead, as warmed, it goes up to the end of the troposphere and discharges that heat – swaps it for enough coldness to cancel the heat produced by the fire – and one cubic inch of air continues going up and down every minute, until you put the cigarette off, then it stops instantly, not to bring more coldness than necessary. That same thing happens for heat produced by CO2, heat from the erupting volcano, heat from smelter for melting iron ore, and for any other heat. Troposphere expands and shrinks constantly, as required, like piano accordion. Can expand by one inch, by 3m, actually, the troposphere can double in volume, instantly = can discharge double the amount of heat in minutes
    Q: how does the troposphere knows how much exactly heat to waste for every individual day?
    A: the good Lord has inserted a thermometer in EVERY atom of oxygen &nitrogen – those thermometers are ordering the atoms to expand / shrink ”precisely” according to heat/coldness! The extra heat produced in individual day determines the ”precise” volume of the troposphere
    Therefore: for the last 150y, the sun produced lots of heat on the earth, lots of heat produced by the geothermal, lots of heat produced by burning fossil fuel – all that heat is gone, all of it – Since the ”middle” of LIA until today hasn’t accumulated enough ”extra” heat ”overall”, what one cigarette burning can produce!!! That’s infallible precision. If you collect ALL the ‘’extra’’ heat accumulated for the last 10 000y, you wouldn’t have enough heat, to boil one chicken egg. Extra heat in the earth’s atmosphere is NOT accumulative
    LIA is the Skeptic’s biggest weapon – what it was? A: river Thames was frozen for few days – WOW! What was the Medieval ”Global” Warming? A: genuine proof exist, written record from a farmer in Buckingham-shire was producing an ”extra” bushel of grain per acre – another WOW! Friends, planet is a very big place – the ”globe” is NOT spinning around England, would you believe that?
    Yes there was an ice age for 12000 years, but it wasn’t ”global” cannot be global – the ”honest” laws of physics don’t permit that – unless you have abolished those laws of physics by legislation in parliament and in UN – otherwise, those laws don’t compromise!!! Please learn first about the ”self adjusting temperature mechanism the planet earth has”!

    • dumboldguy Says:

      I have been resisting the urge to feed the stefanTD troll, but have to make this one point. This comment of Stefan’s is worthy of immediate enshrinement in the Nutty Physics Hall of Fame. Stefan and others have put out some crazy stuff in the past, but this is absolutely awesome in the depth and breadth of its absurdity. Congratulations, Stefan, no one does it like you! You are in a class by yourself!

      • andrewfez Says:

        Yeah it’s unfair that mbe11 already has 22 down-votes, and stefan only has 2 for all the work he put in here.

        • andrewfez Says:

          There – I cast my vote. Now he has 3. Go stefan!

          • dumboldguy Says:

            He now has 4, although what mbe said was just the usual lying, obfuscation, and misuse of data, and therefore deserves a lot of serious “downs”. Stefan may actually be simply joking with us, and that’s a different category. If he were to admit that he was trying to be funny and absurd, I would give him an “up” for the effort, because he DID succeed.

      • jpcowdrey Says:

        Stefan’s novel explanation of the Ideal Gas Law alone is worthy of enshrinement. To wit:

        “A: the good Lord has inserted a thermometer in EVERY atom of oxygen &nitrogen – those thermometers are ordering the atoms to expand / shrink ”precisely” according to heat/coldness!”

        Physics is hard!

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Yep, that “atomic thermometer” bit was my favorite also. I wonder how I missed that when I studied physics?

    • andrewfez Says:

      =Please learn first about the ”self adjusting temperature mechanism the planet earth has”!=


    • dumboldguy, this is for you: do you know that: because on the moon there is no oxygen &nitrogen as ”perfect insulators” – during the day gets to 70C, but at night without those ”insulators – the unlimited coldness is touching the ground and the temp gets to -140C. That’s; from plus +70C to minus -140C at night. That is very extreme climate.

      On the earth, coat of O2%N2 20km thick is shielding the planet, BUT, we pump and compress it into billions of tires – when you pump the tire on the garage is still plenty air left, BUT, because air settles down from high up , from the upper end of the troposphere – there the air is very thin – needs volume of 10 Olympic pools, to inflate one tire – there are billions of tire on the planet, cars / trucks = less air in the troposphere as ”insulator” that’s why the temp is getting more extreme, with less air to insulate

      Therefore: offender is not CO2 / the exhaust, it is the car/ truck tires. That’s why dogs p!ss on the tires! That’s ”scientific” proof that dogs don’t like cars! You can do that too old boy, if you can still lift one leg up, when you urinate. Well, now you know!

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Hey, stefan! Since there is no atmosphere on the moon, there is no climate to be “extreme”. And talking about “unlimited coldness touching the ground” is more evidence of your science ignorance—-there is no such thing as “coldness” and temperature is not “unlimited” at the low end—-the lowest possible temperature is called “absolute zero” (-459.67°F or -273.15°C or O Kelvin). You’ll learn about this when you take physical science classes in high school.

        The air and tires and dogs pissing things are also not funny—-just dumb—-and more proof that you are still in junior high school. Grow up.


    • dumboldguy, here is another one for you: I’ve discovered that: there are over 20 000 satellites in orbit around the planet and other junk. Those satellites are selfishly spreading those hips of solar panels and are blocking lots of sunlight from coming to the earth -THAT IS ACCUMULATIVE, – every day of the year a bit less sunlight…

      Because of that by the year 2099 THERE WILL BE AN ICE AGE, MONEY BACK GUARANTIED! You start preparing now, for that ice age, old boy!


  7. IF YOU KNOW THE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS – YOU DESERVE $10000
    Q: do you know that: oxygen + nitrogen are 998999ppm in the troposphere, CO2 only 260-400ppm? Q: do you know that O+N expand /shrink INSTANTLY in change of temperature? Q: do you know that: where they expand upwards, on the edge of the troposphere is minus-90⁰C? Q: why O2&N2 expand more, when warmed by 5⁰C, than when warmed by 2⁰C? A: when warmed by 5⁰C, they need to go further up, to release more heat / intercept more, extra coldness, to equalize. Q: if O&N are cooled after 10minutes to previous temperature, why they don’t stay expanded another 5 minutes extra? A: not to intercept too much extra coldness, to prevent too much cooling. A2: they stay expanded precisely as long as they are warmer – not one second more or less – that’s how they regulate to be same warmth units overall in the troposphere, every hour of every year and millennia!
    Q: do you know that: if troposphere warms up by 2⁰C extra – troposphere expands up into the stratosphere by 1km, how much extra coldness is there to intercept? A: intercepts extra appropriate coldness to counteract the extra heat in 3,5 seconds -> that extra coldness falls to the ground in minutes Q: if O+N are warmed extra for 30minutes, why they don’t shrink after 15minutes, or after one day? A: if O&N after cooled to previous temperature; stayed expanded for a whole day extra -> they would have redirected enough extra coldness, to freeze all the tropical rivers / lakes.

    Q: can CO2 of 260-400ppm PREVENT oxygen + nitrogen (998999ppm) of expanding, when they warm up? A: O&N when warmed extra – they expand through the walls of a hi-tensile hand-grenade. Q: do you believe in the laws of physics, or in IPCC and the Warmist / Fake Skeptic cults? The laws of physics say: part of the troposphere can get colder than normal – only when other part gets warmer than normal. B] if the WHOLE troposphere gets colder > air shrinks > releases LESS heat /intercepts less coldness on the edge of the troposphere > retains more heat and equalizes in a jiffy. C] both hemispheres cannot get warmer simultaneously for more than few minutes – if they do -> troposphere expands extra >releases extra heat / intercepts extra coldness and equalizes in a jiffy. Q: do the O+N wait to warm up by 2-3⁰C, before start expanding, or expand instantly extra when they warm up by 0,000001⁰C? All those things can be experimented / replicated now; no need to wait 100y and see that: all they come up with, are immature lies.

    If you collect all the EXTRA heat that will be accumulated on the earth since 97 Kyoto conference to year 2100 – you wouldn’t have enough of that ‘’Extra’’ heat – TO BOIL ONE CHICKEN EGG!!! EXTRA HEAT ON THE EARTH IS NOT
    ACCUMULATIVE, because of the brilliant ‘’temperature self adjusting mechanism’’

    • dumboldguy Says:

      He-e-e-e-e-e i-i-i-s ba-a-a-a-a-a-ack! And his “physics” is crazier than ever. I particularly appreciate the brilliance of his concept of “extra coldness” and its behavior and effects—-a few excerpts below:

      “need to go further up, to release more heat / intercept more, extra coldness, to equalize”

      “extra coldness falls to the ground in minutes”

      “would have redirected enough extra coldness, to freeze all the tropical rivers / lakes”

      I am also struck by his scientific acumen and the preciseness of his language when he says something “equalizes in a jiffy”.

      For those who are unaware, a JIFFY is a unit of measurement that can be calculated for a particular gas thusly:

      Vm = RT/p x (t1 – t2) divided by c

      For those who may be intimidated by the math, stop by your local Jiffy Lube and talk to the guy who puts the air in the tires. That’s where the name came from.

  8. adelady Says:

    I had intended to comment pointing out that the sorts of challenges that Dr Keating is dealing with over at his blog are pretty trivial. In fact most of them aren’t up to the usual standard of the all too dreary regulars on various news sites and climate blogs.

    And stefan turns up here with this physics-in-turmoil word salad. This is more ludicrous and pointless than the youtube videos and NIPCC, Marohasy, and/or other non-science links that some people think Keating should spend his time on. (It’s a good job he’s dedicated himself to this. First TVMOB turns up, then the fools line up and they really seem to think that they’re seriously worth considering for the pay out.)

    It’s a bit of a wake up call for me. I’d half thought that the deniers were getting tired or pulling their heads in lately. Wave around some money and a whole new batch appear from out of the woodwork. (New to me anyway.)


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: