Welcome to the internet's top destination for the civil discussion of politics. This is a forum for discussion and debate of the issues, and not for personal remarks aimed at other discussants.
This forum has no political affiliation and welcomes your perspective on the issues. Membership is free. If you would like to join the discussions and debates please REGISTER HERE.
All new members should review the forum rules. The "Today's Posts" button automatically adjusts itself to fit your screen on its first use for Firefox and on its second use, for Internet Explorer. Have a pleasant day. (This is a spam free board.)
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Ultimate Global
Warming Challenge announced today that it raised to $125,000 the cash award
to the first person to prove in a scientific manner that human emissions of
greenhouse gases will cause catastrophic global climate change.
(JunkScience.com's Ultimate Global Warming Challenge)
"Surprisingly no one has entered the contest yet," said Steven Milloy,
founder and publisher of JunkScience.com and the sponsor of the Ultimate
Global Warming Challenge. "I'm surprised since Al Gore, the United Nations
and the mainstream media all seem to think that the notion of man made
catastrophic global warming is a no-brainer," Milloy added.
The Ultimate Global Warming Challenge was launched on Aug. 7, 2007 with
the popular and highly rated YouTube video entitled, "Can You Save Al
Gore?" ().
"It appears that $100,000 is not enough to spur Al Gore and other
climate alarmists to submit their proofs that humans are causing global
warming," explained Milloy.
"If it's a matter of money, Al Gore and the alarmists should just come
out and tell us what sum it will cost the rest of us to see what proof they
have."
Steven J. Milloy is the founder and publisher of JunkScience.com and
CSRwatch.com, an investment adviser to the Free Enterprise Action Fund, and
a columnist for FoxNews.com.
To schedule an interview, contact Audrey Mullen at 703-548-1160.
[url="http://www.junkscience.com/"]Ultimate Global Warming Challenge Ups Prize Money to $125,000 for Proving Humans Cause Catast.....
100.000 Dollar is in fact a lousy amount of money, for a task like that. Especially if no sane man would expect to see it even if he would do what he is asked to do.
Apart from that most scientist hardly won't waste their valuable time for entering a contest that is judged by such a partisan writer like Milloy.
And what the hell means "prove in a scientific manner" exactly? Scientific studies never 100% prove something. That would not be scientific. Theories only can be disproven by a sole negative experiment under circumstances (or at least a few), but they cant be proven beyond doubt even after a million positive experiments.
Milloy does not sound like someone who is really interested in science when he creates those fake prices which is aimed to do the opposite of what it claims it wants to do. A scientific theory is not a rocket into space. The X-prize for example has very clear criteria and can't evade paying therefore, Milloy's prize has nothing like that.
Quote:
# Entrants acknowledge that the concepts and terms mentioned and referred to in the UGWC hypotheses are inherently and necessarily vague, and involve subjective judgment. JunkScience.com reserves the exclusive right to determine the meaning and application of such concepts and terms in order to facilitate the purpose of the contest.
Rules excerpt.
Nice, sounds really trustworthy. They deliberately make a vague statement and tell you that in case of doubt they judge what they actually meant by it. Why not being clear in the first place?
Quote:
All entries must represent the original work of an entrant that has been produced specifically for the UGWC.
Yeah of course... for sure a serious climatologist will base his whole work on an unscientific competition of a partisan site.
Moreover you do not only need a good climatologist team to have a chance, you need as well sociologists, economists etc etc to handle the second Hypothesis as well.
__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"
TONIGHT'S airing of The Great Global Warming Swindle and the associated discussion on ABC TV should be a hoot. The ABC has structured the panel to try to get their preferred political position aired. The panel composition will minimise scientific discussion. It contains journalists, political pressure groups and those who will make a quid out of frightening us witless.
Three scientists with a more rational view to the doomsday hype were invited to appear on the panel and have now been uninvited as they do not dance to the drumbeat of disaster.
TONIGHT'S airing of The Great Global Warming Swindle and the associated discussion on ABC TV should be a hoot. The ABC has structured the panel to try to get their preferred political position aired. The panel composition will minimise scientific discussion. It contains journalists, political pressure groups and those who will make a quid out of frightening us witless.
Three scientists with a more rational view to the doomsday hype were invited to appear on the panel and have now been uninvited as they do not dance to the drumbeat of disaster.
Actually its not my beer what your TV stations do or dont to. I also dont care. I also dont know the real reasons why they very uninvented. I mean if they would like to manipulate the public opinion why inviting them in first place? What was the official reason stated by the ABC for that action?
What was however interesting is how the current US administration did quite a bit to silence scientists who did not agree to with the administrations opinions, or who presented scientific data that collided with them.
PS:
You did not refer to any of my points of critique towards this prize.
__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"
This sounds like challenges to prove that God does not exist or that evolution is not phony. Science does not work that way. The preponderance of evidence and consensus of credible climate scientists and institutions of higher learning and research is that human forcing is a significant factor in modern climate change. It should be noted that even among those who support human influence in global warming do not necessarily agree on the fine details. That is normal and does not negate the consensus. There will always be a fraction of scientists who disagree, which is healthy. However, given the extreme seriousness of the likely impacts of this change, it is foolish to insist that there must be absolute, 100% agreement before taking any substantive actions.
[quote=Wheeldog;89092]This sounds like challenges to prove that God does not exist or that evolution is not phony. QUOTE]
evolution is pretty much proven..
while theres never been a shred of evidence to suggest god exists..
but anyways, I don't think global warming is hapening because of humans.. the earths temperature fluctuates like this on a millions of years basis.. this time is no difference..
This sounds like challenges to prove that God does not exist or that evolution is not phony. QUOTE]
evolution is pretty much proven..
while theres never been a shred of evidence to suggest god exists..
but anyways, I don't think global warming is hapening because of humans.. the earths temperature fluctuates like this on a millions of years basis.. this time is no difference..
Just because global climate knows many factors, does not mean humans could not be one of them...
__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"
This sounds like challenges to prove that God does not exist or that evolution is not phony. QUOTE]
evolution is pretty much proven..
while theres never been a shred of evidence to suggest god exists..
but anyways, I don't think global warming is hapening because of humans.. the earths temperature fluctuates like this on a millions of years basis.. this time is no difference..
actually, there have been scientists who have said that there has to be a God, or some higher power
actually, there have been scientists who have said that there has to be a God, or some higher power
Science can neither prove or disprove the existence of a supreme spiritual being. On the other hand, religion cannot prove that God exists. It is a matter of faith. Faith does not require proof. If it did it would called science not faith.
Wanna earn an easy $125,000? Prove that Humans Cause Global Warming
Linear Mode
