Put up or shut up!

[westwall]

Here is a chance for every AGW alarmist to make 10 grand. The only catch is you can't lie to get the cash!



ACTIVIST CLIMATE GUY: $10K Climate Challenge

 

[Old Rocks]

Then the descendents of Tyndal have a right to that prize. Like previously stated, the asshole will never pay out, in spite of the fact that there is already ample proof of AGW. The parent organization of the AGU, the American Institute of Physics has made unequivacal statements concerning the fact that CO2 is the primary driver of the warming that we are seeing.

Once more, for any new to the debate, here is an article from the American Institute of Physics concerning the history of the study of GHGs and the affect on the atmosphere.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now real scientists wrote this, not ex-TV weathermen, or dotty English lords. Real scientists, not faceless people on a message board.

 

[mdn2000]

Then the descendents of Tyndal have a right to that prize. Like previously stated, the asshole will never pay out, in spite of the fact that there is already ample proof of AGW. The parent organization of the AGU, the American Institute of Physics has made unequivacal statements concerning the fact that CO2 is the primary driver of the warming that we are seeing.

Once more, for any new to the debate, here is an article from the American Institute of Physics concerning the history of the study of GHGs and the affect on the atmosphere.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now real scientists wrote this, not ex-TV weathermen, or dotty English lords. Real scientists, not faceless people on a message board.

Nice story, I like the first line;

Like many Victorian natural philosophers, John Tyndall was fascinated by a great variety of questions

I did not make it much further, seems like bad science to keep trying to prove a theory from the 19th century.

 

[westwall]

Then the descendents of Tyndal have a right to that prize. Like previously stated, the asshole will never pay out, in spite of the fact that there is already ample proof of AGW. The parent organization of the AGU, the American Institute of Physics has made unequivacal statements concerning the fact that CO2 is the primary driver of the warming that we are seeing.

Once more, for any new to the debate, here is an article from the American Institute of Physics concerning the history of the study of GHGs and the affect on the atmosphere.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now real scientists wrote this, not ex-TV weathermen, or dotty English lords. Real scientists, not faceless people on a message board.

Wrong again boyo! This is a promise to pay. If he doesn't pay out he can be quite easily sued and the way it is written he would automatically lose. So like I said. Put up or shut up.

 

[Old Rocks]

Then the descendents of Tyndal have a right to that prize. Like previously stated, the asshole will never pay out, in spite of the fact that there is already ample proof of AGW. The parent organization of the AGU, the American Institute of Physics has made unequivacal statements concerning the fact that CO2 is the primary driver of the warming that we are seeing.

Once more, for any new to the debate, here is an article from the American Institute of Physics concerning the history of the study of GHGs and the affect on the atmosphere.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now real scientists wrote this, not ex-TV weathermen, or dotty English lords. Real scientists, not faceless people on a message board.

Nice story, I like the first line;

Like many Victorian natural philosophers, John Tyndall was fascinated by a great variety of questions

I did not make it much further, seems like bad science to keep trying to prove a theory from the 19th century.

mdn, I find it entirely believable that you got no further than the first sentence. I am quite sure that you have never got any further in anything to do with science.

 

[elvis]

Then the descendents of Tyndal have a right to that prize. Like previously stated, the asshole will never pay out, in spite of the fact that there is already ample proof of AGW. The parent organization of the AGU, the American Institute of Physics has made unequivacal statements concerning the fact that CO2 is the primary driver of the warming that we are seeing.

Once more, for any new to the debate, here is an article from the American Institute of Physics concerning the history of the study of GHGs and the affect on the atmosphere.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now real scientists wrote this, not ex-TV weathermen, or dotty English lords. Real scientists, not faceless people on a message board.

Nice story, I like the first line;

Like many Victorian natural philosophers, John Tyndall was fascinated by a great variety of questions

I did not make it much further, seems like bad science to keep trying to prove a theory from the 19th century.

mdn, I find it entirely believable that you got no further than the first sentence. I am quite sure that you have never got any further in anything to do with science.

He probably got farther than you did...

 

[Old Rocks]

$10k Challenge Challenge


That is just the final paragraph of a rabid rant from a real looney. Read the whole link. Then consider that Walleyes claims to be a scientist, a geologist, and posts this kind of fecal material.


Peter Laux's Statutory Declaration for $10K Climate Challenge : Peter Laux : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

For those who despise the source of their prosperous lives and wish to burden those who can least afford it with carbon taxes and cripple the development in the 3rd world, I offer you $10,000.00 (AUS) for a conclusive argument based on empirical facts that increasing atmospheric CO2 from fossil fuel burning drives global climate warming."

 

[Old Rocks]

Nice story, I like the first line;



I did not make it much further, seems like bad science to keep trying to prove a theory from the 19th century.

mdn, I find it entirely believable that you got no further than the first sentence. I am quite sure that you have never got any further in anything to do with science.

He probably got farther than you did...

Oh, go find another holy roller preacher to carry bags for, and give backrubs, Rent-a-Boy

 

[Revere]

Crash some other country's economy for something you can't prove is happening, and can't prove you can reverse.

 

[elvis]

mdn, I find it entirely believable that you got no further than the first sentence. I am quite sure that you have never got any further in anything to do with science.

He probably got farther than you did...

Oh, go find another holy roller preacher to carry bags for, and give backrubs, Rent-a-Boy

Aw. Is your partisan pussy still bleeding?

 

[westwall]

$10k Challenge Challenge


That is just the final paragraph of a rabid rant from a real looney. Read the whole link. Then consider that Walleyes claims to be a scientist, a geologist, and posts this kind of fecal material.


Peter Laux's Statutory Declaration for $10K Climate Challenge : Peter Laux : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

For those who despise the source of their prosperous lives and wish to burden those who can least afford it with carbon taxes and cripple the development in the 3rd world, I offer you $10,000.00 (AUS) for a conclusive argument based on empirical facts that increasing atmospheric CO2 from fossil fuel burning drives global climate warming."

And yet again I challenge you olfraud to present one lie that I have stated. Just one....I dare you!

 

[peter laux]

Hi oldrocks, how are you ? Really brave by the looks of things hiding behind your anonymous posts.
Bit like a stallion, "big when they are out."
So I am an asshole who wont pay up ? Apart from the fact you would not possess the courage to say that face to face, are you the all seeing Delphic oracle? Do you know me? What basis do you come to that conclusion, the same one that makes you a AGW religionist I suppose, like "the vibe" or perhaps just your "middle-class angst" ?
So come on sweetheart, don't play big swinging dick here, come and take up the challenge if your oh so sure of yourself.
I went to that pathetic link you posted and unlike yourself i'm not obsequious enough to defer to experts without investigation, so is that the best you can do? They tried to falsely intimate Vostock ice-cores showed a link between CO2 and temperature to prove their hypothesis but failed to mention that the ice-cores show that CO2 TRAILS temperature increase. Priceless, too easy, too mediocre.

 

[mdn2000]

mdn, I find it entirely believable that you got no further than the first sentence. I am quite sure that you have never got any further in anything to do with science.

He probably got farther than you did...

Oh, go find another holy roller preacher to carry bags for, and give backrubs, Rent-a-Boy

Old Crock, did you even read your own link, in the past you have not, again, why link to an article that begins with 19th century philosophy, explain the relevance.

 

[westwall]

Hi oldrocks, how are you ? Really brave by the looks of things hiding behind your anonymous posts.
Bit like a stallion, "big when they are out."
So I am an asshole who wont pay up ? Apart from the fact you would not possess the courage to say that face to face, are you the all seeing Delphic oracle? Do you know me? What basis do you come to that conclusion, the same one that makes you a AGW religionist I suppose, like "the vibe" or perhaps just your "middle-class angst" ?
So come on sweetheart, don't play big swinging dick here, come and take up the challenge if your oh so sure of yourself.
I went to that pathetic link you posted and unlike yourself i'm not obsequious enough to defer to experts without investigation, so is that the best you can do? They tried to falsely intimate Vostock ice-cores showed a link between CO2 and temperature to prove their hypothesis but failed to mention that the ice-cores show that CO2 TRAILS temperature increase. Priceless, too easy, too mediocre.

Welcome to the olfraud intervention. I gave you a pos rep because olfraud no doubt neg repped you because that is just the way he is. Rather pathetic, but there you go. He is what he is.

 

[Si modo]

Then the descendents of Tyndal have a right to that prize. Like previously stated, the asshole will never pay out, in spite of the fact that there is already ample proof of AGW. The parent organization of the AGU, the American Institute of Physics has made unequivacal statements concerning the fact that CO2 is the primary driver of the warming that we are seeing.

Once more, for any new to the debate, here is an article from the American Institute of Physics concerning the history of the study of GHGs and the affect on the atmosphere.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now real scientists wrote this, not ex-TV weathermen, or dotty English lords. Real scientists, not faceless people on a message board.

Wrong again boyo! This is a promise to pay. If he doesn't pay out he can be quite easily sued and the way it is written he would automatically lose. So like I said. Put up or shut up.

Rocks has put up: correlation is causation. It's not his problem that the scientific community can't see that. He has been ripped off.

 

[konradv]

Correlation is causation? It's more than mere correlation that proves that CO2 absorbs infra-red radiation. What happens to that radiation, given the LAW (no theory here!) of Conservation of Energy? What happens when you get more radiation-absorbing gases around, given the ~1/3 rise in concentrations since the advent of the IR? Usually..., more absorbed energy. Where's THAT energy going?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Correlation is causation? It's more than mere correlation that proves that CO2 absorbs infra-red radiation. What happens to that radiation, given the LAW (no theory here!) of Conservation of Energy? What happens when you get more radiation-absorbing gases around, given the ~1/3 rise in concentrations since the advent of the IR? Usually..., more absorbed energy. Where's THAT energy going?

Already covered, before Man made Global warming started to be the catch word it was a well established SCIENTIFIC fact as CO2 goes up in the atmosphere there is a diminishing effect on heat retention.

Further the basic fact is that through out history as we can study it, CO2 FOLLOWS, does not LEAD, rising temperatures. Another well established SCIENTIFIC FACT.

 

[konradv]

Correlation is causation? It's more than mere correlation that proves that CO2 absorbs infra-red radiation. What happens to that radiation, given the LAW (no theory here!) of Conservation of Energy? What happens when you get more radiation-absorbing gases around, given the ~1/3 rise in concentrations since the advent of the IR? Usually..., more absorbed energy. Where's THAT energy going?

Already covered, before Man made Global warming started to be the catch word it was a well established SCIENTIFIC fact as CO2 goes up in the atmosphere there is a diminishing effect on heat retention.

Further the basic fact is that through out history as we can study it, CO2 FOLLOWS, does not LEAD, rising temperatures. Another well established SCIENTIFIC FACT.

You seem to have your facts backwards. It's a well-known scientific fact that CO2 and other gases absorb energy in the infra-red range. How would extra retained energy result in lower temps? That seems to violate CofE. What you claim as "SCIENTIFIC FACT" is no more than the opinion of some, with even less actual scientific backing than the theory you're trying to discredit. Nice try, but mere declarations don't cut it. You've proven nothing. At least try to answer a simple question, "where does the energy go, if not to heat the earth?"

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Correlation is causation? It's more than mere correlation that proves that CO2 absorbs infra-red radiation. What happens to that radiation, given the LAW (no theory here!) of Conservation of Energy? What happens when you get more radiation-absorbing gases around, given the ~1/3 rise in concentrations since the advent of the IR? Usually..., more absorbed energy. Where's THAT energy going?

Already covered, before Man made Global warming started to be the catch word it was a well established SCIENTIFIC fact as CO2 goes up in the atmosphere there is a diminishing effect on heat retention.

Further the basic fact is that through out history as we can study it, CO2 FOLLOWS, does not LEAD, rising temperatures. Another well established SCIENTIFIC FACT.

You seem to have your facts backwards. It's a well-known scientific fact that CO2 and other gases absorb energy in the infra-red range. How would extra retained energy result in lower temps? That seems to violate CofE. What you claim as "SCIENTIFIC FACT" is no more than the opinion of some, with even less actual scientific backing than the theory you're trying to discredit. Nice try, but mere declarations don't cut it. You've proven nothing. At least try to answer a simple question, "where does the energy go, if not to heat the earth?"

Ohh I don't know, perhaps that ICE COLD void that SURROUNDS the Earth?

 

[editec]

Yeah a denier offers to pay but only if you can teach him the science, first.

And given that he's already dismissed the science, he's telling you that he's never gonna pay.

Could he just be a tad more circular with his logic?