Something about the eyes..............
Posted on 06/25/2014 12:24:02 PM PDT by Twotone
A physics professor is so fed up with the claims made by “climate change deniers” that he has launched a “$10,000 Global Warming Skeptic Challenge.”
The challenge issued by Dr. Christopher Keating, a professor who previously taught at the University of South Dakota and the U.S. Naval Academy, according to a news release, will award prize money to anyone who uses the scientific method to prove that human activity has not been a factor leading to climate change.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
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...
And many of the variables may “butterfly effect” the results.
“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.
That’s what I was thinking. How about PROVING it, to begin with. They have yet to do so.
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.
It deserves to be mocked. NOBODY should send him anything.
I wonder what is the true education of this "scientist."
Something about the eyes..............
You can’t prove a negative.............
And that's what emboldens him even on this small scale, knowing he's got nothing to lose especially if he's the arbiter of who might win the $10k.
HF
A more interesting challenge would be to prove AGW is real. All they have are an hypothesis and a theory which the scientist who conceived it said was invalid before his death, heavily rigged computer models, and the bought and paid for opinions of an academic cadre, very few of whom have degrees in the atmospheric sciences. We’re supposed to rely on the opinions of astronomers, physicists, biologists, and a divinity school flunk out and failed political candidate.
Apparently he doesn’t know that the scientific method can’t be used to prove a negative.
In this case one would just need to show a natural reason for the increase in temperatures.
This ought to get him ridicule from all scientists — he’s abusing the very concept of science.
I would like if the climatologists who are the most vocal proponents of anthropomorphic global warming would be willing, if the technology existed, to significantly decrease atmospheric CO2 levels. Do they have enough confidence in their theories and computer modeling to actually feel comfortable altering the Earth’s atmosphere? Would they be confident in the outcome of such manipulation?
I’m going to guess that the answer is no.
Here's the lie-teller, and a sample from his blog. Climate Change Denial is the Moral Equivalent of Racism
Fishtank's note: This is what the agitator posted on his bolg.
Easy: Prove there is man-mad climate change.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.