Five Chances To Win One Hundred Trillion Dollars!

A physics professor has offered $30,000 for anyone who can disprove a straw man argument, which no one disagrees with.

Physics professor and climate change expert Dr. Christopher Keating is offering a $30,000 reward to anyone who can disprove that man-made climate change is real.

Physicist Offers $30,000 Reward To Anyone Who Can Disprove Climate Change « CBS DC

That straw man offer is worthless, but I am going to go way past Keating’s offer and give people the opportunity to win one hundred trillion dollars – by simply proving any one of these five statements made by actual climate authorities.

ScreenHunter_776 Jul. 03 21.00

Multi-meter sea level rise on the century time scale (is)  not only possible,  but almost dead certain.

– NASA’s James Hansen

Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,”

– David Viner  CRU 2000

Antarctica is likely to be the world’s only habitable continent by the end of this century if global warming remains unchecked, the Government’s chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, said last week.

– David King  (UK Chief scientist)

there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years 

– Al Gore  Nobel laureate and climate expert 2009

And yes, I am currently in possession of the one hundred trillion dollars government issued currency prize. It is sitting next to me at my desk, and every bit as valuable as a NASA temperature graph.

ScreenHunter_777 Jul. 03 21.19

Runner up wins a Toyyoda

ScreenHunter_778 Jul. 03 21.38

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

68 Responses to Five Chances To Win One Hundred Trillion Dollars!

  1. Benito Suarez says:

    Don’t be giving Dear Leader any ideas now.

  2. Psalmon says:

    Used one of those bills to fill up my gas tank this evening, I did.

  3. Justa Joe says:

    I’ll offer $100 USD to anyone that can prove that UFO’s are not extra-terrestrial vehicles. We can do this all night.

    • B says:

      Some UFOs are certainly US military black projects. That was proven when the stealth aircraft were finally officially announced decades ago. It was also proven by the sketchy Bob Lazar who could take people out to the desert and watch “UFOs” because one way or another he knew the test schedule*. So where’s my $100?

      *I don’t believe Lazar, but he did prove he knew when stuff would be flying.

      • nutso fasst says:

        Once you know what they are then they are no longer UFOs.

      • Justa Joe says:

        ex·tra·ter·res·tri·al
        ˌekstrətəˈrestrēəl/Submit
        adjective
        1.
        of or from outside the earth or its atmosphere.

      • Terry Comeau says:

        Well, technically and linguistically speaking a UFO is any flying object that hasn’t been identified by the observer or observers. So I can identify several objects that were UFOs and are terrestrial. I win the hundred bucks. Well… except that… If an object is not identified we cannot ascertain whether or not they are terrestrial or extra-terrestrial. And if they are identified, as I have done, and their source ascertained, they are no longer unidentified, therefore, they do not fit the original description of being unidentified, so their origin is moot. D’oh!

    • Tony says:

      Unknown to most UFO nuts was the leak many decades ago concerning the interior of the Roswell craft which was a composite material like our carbon fiber except according to the researcher involved it used the vascular bundle of dandelion leaves as the strengthener.
      This was held up as proof that UFOs are terrestrial however I always believed it is not proof enough in that extraterrestrials could and would make craft here if they chose.

  4. It doesn’t even qualify as a straw man, because the requirement is to prove a negative, which is a logical impossibility. I can prove a black swan exists by producing a black swan. But there is no way I can prove that green, red, yellow or purple swans don’t exist. Unless I was omnipotent, of course.

      • _Jim says:

        Your three point five eight (3.58) MHz osc is free running; it is no longer ‘locked’ to the incoming ‘color burst’ reference signal …

      • Anto says:

        Hey, I saw one of those out on the lake a little while ago. I remember it well, because I’d just finished a lovely risotto made with mushrooms I found in the cow paddock down the road.

    • Tel says:

      Not entirely.

      The scientific method depends on being able to prove some specific types of negative. If I have a theory, then an observation that does not match the theory must prove the theory is not correct (i.e. prove a negative). This requires that the theory be falsifiable. Some theories are so broad that they are not falsifiable.

      Suppose I claim there’s something running around in the fridge every time you close the door, but it hides without trace when you go and look. By definition this entity cannot be observed, so no matter what you do you cannot prove it doesn’t exist.

      However, suppose I claim there’s a purple leprechaun sitting right in the middle of your keyboard, all the time and tweaking you on the nose as well. It’s easy to prove the negative, right? I mean you take a look and you say, “Nope, it ain’t there!”

      • Generally speaking if one is discussing inductive logic one is referring to the general case, not the special case. I.e., you can’t prove that the sun won’t rise tomorrow, although it’s very likely that it will. But I can prove that the sun rose on the 4th of July.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Offer me enough money and I will come up with any color swan you want. It will even SPARKLE!
      http://www.twinkleglitter.com/ProductsIntro.html

  5. Frank Lee says:

    Al Gore’s comment about “the entire north polar ice cap” would seem to include Greenland as well. How nuts is this guy?

    • B says:

      Not nuts at all. He’s made quite a lot of money from it. We know he doesn’t believe it. It shows in his actions. Beach front mansion, a home/office compound in his home state that consumes as much energy as a third world country or something like that…. he flies all over the planet consuming much more energy than needed by a mundane to just get from a to b. their actions always give them away.

  6. Bad Andrew says:

    Man Made Climate Change has to be recognizable first. No one has found a way to do that yet.

    Andrew

  7. Dave N says:

    Wait for it: because no-one in their right mind will take up the offer, he’ll proclaim “victory”. The only thing he achieves here is his own proof that he’s an idiot.

  8. Morgan says:

    Do I get an extra digit if I prove Mann made climate change is real? Does it go to $30,0000?

    • BallBounces says:

      It goes to $030,000, with the climate scientists issuing a press release saying “the science” now says AGW is an order of magnitude worse than previously thought.

  9. Truthseeker says:

    The words say one hundred trillion dollars, but the numbers say one hunded billion dollars.

    1,000,000 = 1 million
    1,000,000,000 = 1 thousand million
    1,000,000,000,000 = 1 billiion

    I am not an American. I can count.

  10. Andy DC says:

    I want someone to disprove that little green aliens (not the Mexican kind) will take over the world in 50 years.

    • miked1947 says:

      Andy:
      The only way to disprove that is to wait 50 years. Even then it might be questionable! 😉
      Just like CACC!

  11. Larry Fields says:

    A standard sleazy debating tactic is to put words into the mouth of someone with whom he disagrees. Or to reword something he actually did say. Here’s the actual quote:

    “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,”
    – David Viner CRU 2000

    Now here’s Wet Blanket Larry’s revised version:

    “Children just aren’t going to know what real science is.”

    I’d like my 100 trillion in gold, please. 🙂

    • diogenese2 says:

      Also the comment from Sir David King was not true – this was the version of Geoffrey Lean, idiot environmental columnist in the DT. King said ” current CO2 level are highest for 56m years.. when the Antarctic was the best place to be ….the rest of the world was uninhabitable”. He was referring to the Eocene Thermal Maximum – 30m years before the Antarctic ice sheet first formed. This was not a stupid belief but a deliberate deceit of a house of commons select committee in 2004. In that (warm) era the whole planet was teeming with diverse life – it was the high tide of the age of the mammals. Even with 6 months of night Antarctica was balmy. Life adapted to the long diurnal.

  12. Tom P says:

    There is an old lady in my village who has a black cat. I offer 3 guineas to anyone who can prove the cat doesn’t turn into the devil at night.

    Burning the old lady and seeing if she survives doesn’t count. She might still be a witch. I want proof.

  13. Gamecock says:

    “Dr. Christopher Keating is offering a $30,000 reward to anyone who can disprove that man-made climate change is real.”

    Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.

    • Keating is the same guy who labeled me “the Gestapo of the Heartland Institute” in one of his blog posts. His blog got swamped with commenters, so he swapped over systems which erased most of his comment content. But where he stooped to Nazi name-calling, the comment section dialog between him and me lives on in archive form, fully establishing Keating’s inability to answer straight-up challenges: http://archive.today/Ctwun

  14. philjourdan says:

    I would really like one of those bills as a souvenir, but I am not going to waste time trying to prove idiots correct.

  15. LOL in Oregon says:

    Hey!
    I can prove them
    97% of “scientists”
        (as identified by the eco-religious fanatic folk)
    agree “climate change” is:
    1. real – of course the climate is changing,
        this ain’t the Minoan Warm period anymore and
        the Ice age will be here pretty soon
    2. man-made – of course
        UHI is a huge factor around the eco-religious zealot’s concrete condos
        and they claim they are responsible for it!
        That’s about as “clueless egotist made” as you can get.
    3. dangerous – of course, the UHI is raising the a/c bills dangerously high!
        those poor surplus population are starving
        as they struggle to pay their
       skyrocketing gasoline bills, electric bills, and no jobs
           since they were replace with bots, really simple bots at that!…
    Now, the other 3%, they are token poster children to gain sympathy

    The multi-meter sea rise, of course,
        back in 15000 BC or so when the Columba ice dam broke
            and the Missoula Floods drained most of the Pacific NW!

    Not know what snow is?
    Of course, with current educational indoctrination,
        the clueless eco-religious fanatics have removed “snow”
       from the Wiki so the kids can’t know what it is
            as they plagiarize for their course from their social media.

    Last I check, Antarctica is the only continent really habitable….. to penguins.
    and, compared to 25,000 BC, the Arctic is really “ice free”: shoot, there is even some open water.

    There, I’ve proved them all, where’s my dough?
    Haaa, Haaa, Haaa!

  16. Doug M says:

    What Keating is attempting to do is change the null hypothesis. No one need disprove man made climate change, the null hypothesis is that all climate change is natural. The burden of proof is on Keating and others to prove otherwise, which of course no one has yet accomplished.

  17. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    Very few people say that there is no global warming. And almost everyone also says humans have caused some warming.

    My estimate for the effect of CO2 is 0.7 C/doubling. That is quite harmless, since to get more than 2 C of warming you’d have to put about 30 times as much CO2 into the atmosphere that we have done since Ug discovered fire. Its isn’t going to happen.

    Dr Keating should ask the correct question: who can disprove CAGW? I think he’d get quite a few takers, including me, since no one has yet shown my calc is wrong.

  18. I would go about this another way. Have the Physics Professor detail the studies that would be required to disprove man is causing AGW.
    1) Has the rate of change of temperature increased since man started producing CO2? Nope.
    2) Is there a lead in CO2 vs temperature? Nope
    3) Has the relationship between CO2 and Temp been altered since man strated producing CO2? Nope.
    4) Has the rate of chance of sea level increased since man started producing CO2? Nope.
    5) Has CO2 increases led to run away catastrophic temperature increases in the past? Nope.
    6) Is there any time in history when climate wasn’t changing?
    7) What evidence is there that climate is changing any more today than before man?
    8) How can you have a 97% concensus when 95% of IPCC models have been rejected at the 95% confidence level?
    9) What caused the ice ages during periods of much higher CO2 if CO2 is the cause of warming?
    10) How can a 97% concensus be reached when there aren’t the data sets to construct a proper model? What long term solar data do they have? What long term cloud cover data do the have? What longterm ocean temperature do they have? What surface level solar radiation data do they have? What long term humidity data do they have? This “science” hasn’t even begun to collect the data required to reach a “97% concensus” in any real science.

    Bottom line, there isn’t a single study the professor will be able to point to that will prove his point. He won’t even be able to point to studies were flasks of varying CO2 levels around 400 ppms trap measurable heat. Turn the tables on this professor, force him to defend his conclusion and evidednce in public.

  19. I forgot the most importatant question for the Physist, how will raising taxes result in the government being able to control the climate? Just what solution do the AGW alarmists offer the world? How will the government be able to control the climate, let alone weather? What solutions do they offer, and at what cost? How much will it cost in human suffering to keep CO2 at 350PPM?

  20. Um, I’d hang on to that note, Steve.

  21. Tranard L.Jackson says:

    Who are we in debt ? Or not. Is the debt mean that I am owed money? Do my grandmother owe me . Or is the people who I think are my family are not. What rights do I have ? We are both suffering and for what. Secrets that should not be a secret. I can I not receive what belong to me? It is easy to rob someone. Who is the real Robin Hood or is he getting framed ? Where is my money ?? Marveit got it. Or some one else.

  22. barrett says:

    I live on Fisher ln 4 nv is.

  23. Reblogged this on Real Science and commented:

    Nine months later, still no takers of my $100 trillion challenge

  24. I’m disabled and have custody of my grandson and ONLY get Social Security Disability Income of $984.00, per month. I worked at the USPS as a rural mail carrier when I injured myself on the job, that caused me to become disabled for life and have struggled to survive off of my disability but know that if not for our LORD&SAVIOUR, Jesus that I would have lost everything, years ago, so I give ALL of the GLORY&PRAISE2HIM but continue praying that something change real soon so that I could stop wondering how we’re going to make it from month to month on next to nothing.I know Jesus is watching over us but I also believe that he knows how hard it has been on me, trying to make it month to month and BELIEVE that with his help that I’m going to be blessed by something big, such as winning the sweepstakes so that I have the ability to care for my Grandson and give him ALL OF HIS NEEDS&ALSO SOME OF HIS WANTS,W/OUT THE BURDEN OF BARELY SCATHING TO SURVIVE and also as a testimony to many people around the world that with just the faith of a mustard-seed, that GOD CAN&WILL answer my prayers. I know that he is real and that he does care about us and doesn’t liked to see us suffer but he also doesn’t want us taking him for granted and THAT through him ALL THINGS ARE NOT ONLY POSSIBLE, BUT CAN&DO HAPPEN AS LONG AS YOU PUT YOUR FAITH IN HIM, GIVE THANKS TO HIM& THANK HIM FOR ALL THAT WE DO AND WILL EVER HAVE, WHILE ON THIS EARTH, UNTIL JUDGEMENT DAY.

  25. Elias.Sipitakum says:

    I Elias.Sipitakum from
    Papua New Guinea.I got your
    website of win real money
    and I saw $100 trillion doller
    I very poor person and please
    coul you help me.My country was very
    poor with no basic service
    reaching my home.Tell me how will I get that money
    If I win we will share together
    Thankyou

  26. Odalys says:

    Yo Odalys Hechavarria los $ 100 trillion doller compartir con familiars gracias

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s