10. Since GHGT promoters still call it a theory, they acknowledge it is not a Law.
Since some GHGT promoters claim it is not falsifiable, they place it in
the realm of religion, superstition or politics. This is evidence they
accept it is not a Law.
12. Science has clear criteria standards to
be met before a theory is considered true. Engineering profession has
13. Both sets of standards must be satisfied
before GHGT is deemed proven; if any one criterion is not satisfied, it
is not proven.
14. Since there are a number of evolving attempts to define the GHGT, there is no accepted standard version.
Therefore a correct one is not finally offered for rebuttal. No
proposed unique GHGT exists. Without a uniqueness proof, it must be held
Since Earth’s atmosphere is a chemical process system, chemical
engineers holding degrees from accredited universities and professional
licenses from State governments are qualified to be Deniers.
Since GHGT claims anthropogenic CO2 causes catastrophic global warming
and climate change, the terms catastrophic, climate and change must be
quantified scientifically, mathematically, before they can reasonably be
21. Correlation does not prove causation. That breaks the foundation of GHGT.
24. Unintended consequences must be identified, according to the Precautionary Principle.
Actual financial damages from anthropogenic CO2 must be quantified.
Otherwise the catastrophe denial exercise is futile punching as a ghost.
27. Photosynthesis is cooling and CO2 consuming chemical
reaction neglected by GHGT. CO2 is green plant food, an important Law of
science neglected by GHGT
The proposed theory must predict behavior in nature which is verified
by observation measurement. This has not been done, so GHGT must be
30. In summary the theory must be completely defined and explained to anyone invited to falsify it.
32. If Denier shows GHGT violates Stefan-Boltzmann Law of radiation intensity, that would be sufficient. This has been done.
33. If Denier shows GHGT violates a Law of thermodynamics, that would be sufficient. This has been done.
34. If Denier shows GHGT incorrectly uses the law of radiant energy transfer, that would be sufficient. This has been done.
If Denier shows a thermostat for Earth adjusting fossil fuel combustion
rate is unmeasurable, unobservable or uncontrollable and hence will
never work, that would be sufficient. This has been done.
Denier finds one peer reviewed paper by a professor of physics that
falsified GHGT, that would be sufficient. This has been done.
37. The Reward Offerer may not be a judge of a Denier’s falsification success since that would be a conflict of interest.
38. Merely having $10,000 does not qualify one to judge the scientific arguments of Deniers.
39. The judges must be identified at the outset, with credentials and agreement on the rules and score keeping.
The Reward Offerer must disclose who is financing the reward. Any
government financing may be deemed inappropriate by invited Deniers.
Since many promoters of GHGT lack credentials and have public records
of unprofessional conduct in the debate attempting to elevate GHGT
conjecture to scientific Law, like name calling, hate mail, slander,
intimidation, threats, and bogus lawsuits, the Reward Offerer should
indemnify any contestant from harm, including from government.
Guaranteeing anonymity is a minimum.
42. What assurance do Deniers
have the Reward Offerer will designate someone a winner and grant Award
rather than arbitrarily reject all responses?
43. Will Reward Offerer publish results and acknowledge Denier successfully showed GHGT remains unproven?
44. If it looks like a scam email offer of a free lunch, it probably is. There is no such thing as a free lunch either.
Stefan-Boltzmann Radiation Law gives temperature of any radiating body
with emissivity e < 1 as T = 100(I/5.67e)0.25. Earth’s global
emissivity is difficult to measure or determine, but Standard Global
Climate Model uses e = 0.612. It increases with content of radiating
gases like H2O and CO2. (It goes down with T.) Since e is in the
denominator, if e increases, T decreases. That proves CO2 has a small
global cooling effect.
46. GHGT underlying global warming and climate change claims is thereby falsified. Forever. By scientific method.
Since there are many proofs the GHGT is false in the peer reviewed
literature and internet since 1997, the fact Reward Offerer is making
this offer in 2014 proves he is unfamiliar with the literature. He can
be excused since the literature on GHGT, global warming and climate
change is in such a poor intellectual state.
48. When Reward Offerer
fulfills all these conditions for a fair contest according to the
scientific method, Deniers should consider teaching GHGT Promoters how
to reject unproven theories and claiming the award.
49. Until then Deniers are free to assume the Reward Offer is not legitimate and they may rightfully claim it.
50. Since I just did falsify GHGT throughout and precisely in item 43, I claim the $10,000 as rightfully mine.