CHALLENGE
$100,000 will be awarded to the first person to prove, in a scientific manner, that humans are causing harmful global warming. The winning entry will specifically reject both of the following two hypotheses:
UGWC Hypothesis 1
Manmade emissions of greenhouse gases do not discernibly, significantly and predictably cause increases in global surface and tropospheric temperatures along with associated stratospheric cooling.
UGWC Hypothesis 2
The benefits equal or exceed the costs of any increases in global temperature caused by manmade greenhouse gas emissions between the present time and the year 2100, when all global social, economic and environmental effects are considered.
Hat Tip: Atlas Shrugs
Okay, lefties...the CAGW X-Prize is out there, IF you can prove it with science, rather than "consensus of opinion"!!!
This outta be like watching hamsters on an exercise wheel!
Posts
3 comments :
Easy!
UGWC Hypothesis 1
Manmade emissions of greenhouse gases do not discernibly, significantly and predictably cause increases in global surface and tropospheric temperatures along with associated stratospheric cooling.
This is clearly proven false, as since Al Goreacle started his campaign, there has been a noticeable increase in the amount of hot air blowing around the world. This is easily proven by having Al take a "Peak Flow Meter" test.
Step one: Take Al Gore's temperature. If it is warmer than that of the surrounding environment, or close to the accepted 98.6F standard, we may proceed to the next step.
Step two: Have Al blow into the Peak Flow Meter tube. If it registers on any level above zero, we have established that he expells air. Repeat this step 3 times to verify results.
Thus, because his temperature establishes that he is warm, and the Peak Flow Meter test proves he expels air, we may infer that any air he expells will be warm. The same test may be applied to his followers, however, it can be inferred that the results will be the same. In conclusion, the extra hot air expended fruitlessly increases the temperature. To verify the results we can extrapolate from an experiment on a smaller scale- you may place his followers in a room without air conditioning and watch the temperature increase.
UGWC Hypothesis 2
The benefits equal or exceed the costs of any increases in global temperature caused by manmade greenhouse gas emissions between the present time and the year 2100, when all global social, economic and environmental effects are considered.
This one is easily proven wrong by use of scientific logic. Based on the scientific refutation of the first hypothesis, we may move forward to establish that the cost of the emissions from Al Gore and followers outweigh the benefits. Since he began his campaign we have seen an exponential increase in energy wasted by the unnecessary expulsion of hot air, and diversionary waste of resources in the name of Global Warming. This energy or the monetary investment required to fund the wasteful effort could have been or can be used to to better the world (while there is still hope). Instead, by the wastfully energetic expulsion of hot air, the world is being damaged almost irreparably. Those who follow the Goreacle offset whatever good they do the environment by setting aside logic in the pursuit of this goal. On the world-wide scale this Global Warming crusade has lead to and will continue to lead to an increased amount of wasted energy and resources, resulting in a net loss of those resource that could otherwise be applied to seeking energy independence.
For instance the well documented increased energy demand and cost associated with growing, shipping, and converting produce to ethanol damages the land and increases the burden on people and animals, depriving them of an affordable source of nurishment, and diverting resources from investigating alternative sources of fuel that will lead to energy independence from the middle east.
If energy independence is not obtained, then as the world economy increasingly relies on deminishing resources controlled by individuals of corrupt ideology, people will be forced to fight, or surrender to the destructive whims of violent oppressors, thus destroying natural habitats as collateral damage, and no doubt in the release of chemical and biological agents which have a proven track record of causing mass destruction.
The inevitable and potentially immesurable destruction is linked to the amount of resources wasted on NOT using existing locally available energy sources to work towards energy independence, but instead squandered on the hot air and politically motivade misdirection of the people to fight Global Warming, thus leading to a self-fulfilling destructive scenario.
Simply put, by spending energy to fight Global Warming rather than truly work for energy independence, Global Warming (in name) will eventually lead to increased death, destruction, and a global drain of resources.
What? $15 dollar entry fee? THAT's a waste of resources right there!
Bravo!!!
I am throwing roses in your general direction!
Post a Comment