Please contact me here so I can tell you where to send my check.
Why feed a fool?
Also he’s engaging in the usual fraud of elastic terminology.
Why take the bait, anybody. Though he might be hooted at in independent commentary.
I see so the default position on the subject is that it’s true despite the fact that there’s no scientific evidence to support the theory. And, oh BTW, we should destroy our economy based on that default position?
How do you prove a negative?
As Charlie Rangel would say, “Chump change”. Is this all the fool is willing to lose? Why don’t he PUT SOME MONEY where his big mouth is. Ten grand isn’t worth anybody’s time.
Ever heard of the mini-ice age? The climate changes... even before the SUV.
Where do I pick up my check?
A “scientist” wants people to prove a negative? Didn’t he encounter a course in logic somewhere in his science education?
Offer someone a sum that sounds large, but which is far less money than it would cost to do the comprehensive research work.
He is saying: "We have spent hundreds of millions of dollars building our castle in the air - we'll pay you ten thousand if you can dismantle it with one blow."
I would think it would be as hard to disprove it as it is to prove it. Climate changes. It’s done so throughout this planet’s history. It may well be changing now. But how much of that is the natural course of events and how much is due to man? I don’t know how you can quantify one over the other.
Please contact me here so I can tell you where to send my check.
God is doing it. If he can’t disprove God then pay up ahole.
LOL. How do you prove to a religious zealot that he worships a false god?
OLD 3-way incandesce light bulb, hold hand about 1 foot away, turn bulb on low, then medium, then high. Can a difference be felt?
From “Watch Mr. Wizard”.
Playing word games. Everything that physically happens in the world is a factor. The butterfly in the Amazon analogy.
He is very safe making the bet but it still proves nothing.
Dr. Keating must have a book coming out. “Look at me, everybody, look at me!”
Define "has not been a factor."
Does this mean anything above absolutely none?
-PJ
Since Keating and the other alarmists can’t prove their theory either, it sounds like a catch 22 to me-I wouldn’t take the bait just to give him something to talk about...
“to anyone who uses the scientific method to prove that human activity has not been a factor leading to climate change.”
First, he makes you prove a negative. Then, he uses the vague phrase “human activity” which could be almost anything. Then, he says “a factor” which could be .000000000001 of the total conditions affecting climate. Then, he says “leading to” instead of causing. Then, he alone decides whether the proof is valid and he is forced to pay $10,000.
This is just stupid. Why would anyone waste their time and effort on this.
He’s got the scientific process exactly backward.
It is up to him to prove his theorem, and then to have his results repeated by others.
By reserving judgment exclusively to himself, he has completely invalidated the scientific merits of the proposal.