After reading Andrew Bolt's latest insistence that the world has gone mad about global warming, I threw down a challenge to his legion of fellow sceptics:
To his credit Andrew published the challenge, but I wonder if anyone is brave enough to have a go?
Other blogs on: global warming climate change climate change skeptics
If "propaganda has integrity", then Andrew Bolt is a paragon of virtue.
One commenter wrote:
"Given that Global Warming has been news for a few years now, surely some of those early prediction dates must have passed and the events forecast failed to materialise. Time to "out" all those false prophets and hold them accountable for their claims."
===
Ahh, excellent test. I throw this up as a challenge to the sceptics commenting here and, of course, Andrew: if anyone can find verifiable evidence that one of the early prediction dates have passed I will publish it on my blog, Global Warming Watch, under a big heading saying that "I could be wrong about global warming".
My blog lives here: http://globalwarmingwatch.blogspot.com/ and as you can see, I am a strong believer of the idea of man-made global warming.
I might even show Andrew how it's done and say sorry ;)
RULES:
1a. Said evidence may come from the general media, but any claims it makes must be accurate, and be accurately representative of, and sourced to published scientific papers in any of the peer-reviewed scientific journals that exist to cater to the wide-ranging disciplines of climate-science.
1b. No other sources for evidence will be considered. It doesn't have to just ulitmately come from a climate-scientist, or those in closely related fields, but also has had to be published in relevent scientific journals. Don't want nuffin from scientists speaking out of school, so to speak.
2. Entries must be in before Christmas. They will be judged as they come to hand.
3. All entries will be published on my blog, but only those entries proving an earlier-predicted global warming event has not come to pass, and that meet the above conditions, will be posted under the special headline, "I could be wrong about global warming".
4. I am the final arbiter, but will take submissions and consult widely before passing judgement. I commit to remain bias free - hey, my integrity is at stake, and it is something I value highly.
I trust the conditions are not too onerous. You can publish the evidence here, or in the comments section on my blog, and you don't even have to be a sceptic to play - just curious.
So any takers? Can I have a virtual show of hands? Andrew?
To his credit Andrew published the challenge, but I wonder if anyone is brave enough to have a go?
Other blogs on: global warming climate change climate change skeptics
3 comments:
well it's not a scientific journal, but I am a scientist and am going to start my PhD in climate analysis. But here is evidence that Australia is not heating up at all: http://gustofhotair.blogspot.com/
Thanks mate, I'll have a look over the next few days or so (work swamping me at the moment). Why did you choose climate science?
why did I chose climate science? Well I am a statistician, and there seems to bea bit of conficting analysis in the climate science area, especially early research. I chose it because it is, as some politicians say, one of the most important problems that we face today, and indeed, it is a problem.
Post a Comment