Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

deathandtaxesmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 106 posts

Re: Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

#31

Post by kbd »

Malarkey73 wrote: post #26
unabridged wrote: post #18

This is why I'm a skeptic, change my mind: Let's say we have 150 years of accurate temperature data, and it shows an increase of a few degrees. What is the standard deviation in global temperature for 150 year periods for the last 100K or 1M years? How do we know what is significant change? Any data gathered from models (ice core, tree rings, ...) just doesn't have the resolution to answer these questions.

Lets say we have my blood alcohol level measured in the last 5 mins. It's 0.2g/dL. Whats my blood alcohol level throughout my lifetime though - i reckon it goes up and down quite a bit? How do i know I'm drunk or that it was caused by this keg I just drank? Any data gathered from physiological models I will just arbitrarily ignore... just because...[waves hands]

That's a terrible analogy. Blood alcohol level only rises upon consumption of alcohol. Temperature rises and falls due to tons of external (not fully understood) factors.

Re: Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

#32

Post by msandford »

headShrinker wrote: post #22
eglover wrote: post #14

97% consensus? Right away I'm calling bullshit. I think this only proves how immature the academic world tends to be and may point to a bigger problem.

There are plenty of areas to pick apart this article and motivations behind it. 97% consensus isn't one of them. Denial, is old and dead amongst the well informed. Join us.

That kind of consensus is actually worrying to me. It makes it seem like there is very little effort going into ensuring that all the research the climate scientists are doing doesn't have errors.

In other words, in the echo chamber there are no critics.

Kinda like the dumb ideas that occasionally come out of SF because nobody there knows about the real problems that real people have, they just know about the trivial problems that they as single dudes in SF have.

Re: Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

#33

Post by triangleman »

Considering that the theory of anthropogenic climate change is not falsifiable in the first place (a key tenet of the scientific method), this is a strange offer indeed.

There may be a purported "consensus" on climate change but that does not make it scientific: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/07/a-question-for-oreskes...

Re: Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

#34

Post by humanrebar »

crdoconnor wrote: post #9

Let's flip this: 1. I will award $10,000 of my own money to anyone that can demonstrate, via the scientific method, that man-made global climate change IS occurring; 2. There is no entry fee; 3. You must be 18 years old or older to enter; 4. Entries do not have to be original, they only need to be first; 5. I am the final judge of all entries but will provide my comments on why any entry fails to prove the point. Obv…

I had a similar thought. But I take the point more seriously.

To be clear, given the current data it's very likely that the climate is warming.

But there are no empirical data that show we can do anything about it.

A better contest in response to this post would be awarding $10,000 for proof that any plan (cap-and-trade bill X, global carbon tax of Y%) would be a net benefit over a given period of time (50 years, a century?).

This contest wouldn't prove anything either, but it does demonstrate something more profound about the limits of empirical decision making.

Re: Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

#37

Post by ZenPro »

Another stunning HN thread where a subset of posters have decided they know more about climate change than people dedicating their lives to the study of climate change.

Since so many of you are wagering or believing let me just toss out what I believe.

I believe that credible and respected climate change scientists have forgotten more than you could ever know about the subject.

Climate Change deniers are a joke and a menace and are tied neck and neck with creationists for the moron awards.

Re: Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

#38

Post by headShrinker »

msandford wrote: post #32
headShrinker wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of areas to pick apart this article and motivations behind it. 97% consensus isn't one of them. Denial, is old and dead amongst the well informed. Join us.

That kind of consensus is actually worrying to me. It makes it seem like there is very little effort going into ensuring that all the research the climate scientists are doing doesn't have errors. In other words, in the echo chamber there are no critics. Kinda like the dumb ideas that occasionally come out of SF because nobody there knows about the real problems that real people have, they just know about the trivial…

It's important to debate and open old ideas, that's true. But as far as consensus and the News, false debate is extremely damaging. This is a false debate.

Let rejection of consensus exist where an idea is unexplored or where there is actually debate.

Re: Physicist offers $10,000 for anyone to scientifically disprove climate change

#40

Post by unabridged »

mkhaytman wrote: post #30
unabridged wrote: post #18

This is why I'm a skeptic, change my mind: Let's say we have 150 years of accurate temperature data, and it shows an increase of a few degrees. What is the standard deviation in global temperature for 150 year periods for the last 100K or 1M years? How do we know what is significant change? Any data gathered from models (ice core, tree rings, ...) just doesn't have the resolution to answer these questions.

What difference does it make if the cause is entirely man made or not. Should we let 80% of worlds population who live on the coast just deal with rising sea levels, because it natural? Do you really need to know it's causing a rise in temperature to want less trucks and cars polluting the air in your city? Or does the fact that we will never have the historic data to know for sure if humans are causing global warmin…

I agree that I want humans to stop fucking up the earth and I want less pollution. But those feelings do not prove climate change exists. Science doesn't work this way.
Post reply on HN