ing about climate change. It's the least likely to be true. I suppose anything could be true. You know you could be wrong or I could be wrong about anything.

And the reason is because it's so obvious as a thing to check. It has been checked extensively and the people who are the consensus of experts say there's absolutely nothing there. But you can find all over the internet less credible people saying oh it's the sunspots and here's my data and here's my chart and they're all just, so yes you have seen lots of data and charts telling you sunspots are the real cause.

I will bet, let's see I don't know there's a real way to bet on this because maybe we'll never know the real answer in a way that people will agree. But I was, just think of the setup. All of the scientists have heard this theory about sunspots. All of them. They've all heard it. Now you're saying to yourself, Scott if somebody proves climate change is not real they would lose their job and all that. Now if somebody proved that sunspots were the cause of climate change and actually proved it they would be the most lauded and famous scientist of all time. They would be like the Wright brothers. They would be like Einstein. Their name would be famous forever. They would write best-selling books. They would be invited to talk. You couldn't get richer than proving sunspots were the cause of climate change. And it hasn't happened.

There is enormous financial incentive to show that sunspots or anything else causes climate change. Now I know what you're saying. Oh these scientists don't want to buck the mainstream. But bucking the mainstream in terms of questioning all their data would be really dangerous. But showing your own data that doesn't question anybody else's, it's just your own data. Hey look I found out that the sunspots are causing all this. You would be the most famous scientist in the country. It would be a ticket to wealth. And I think anybody would know that.

There are types of things you can't disagree with. Let's say evolution. If you came out with a scientific theory that said evolution was bunk you'd be dead. You know your career would be. If you came out and said we've measured, yeah take the Tony Heller example. If you came out and said we've measured it wrong you're dead. You can't, you'll never get away with that. If you said all our ice core samples are wrong you're dead. If you say that the sea level rise we measured it wrong and the models are wrong so it's not really going to happen you're dead. But if you said that I did a study all by myself and I found that sunspots were causing all the problems you'd be rich. You'd be famous. But your study would have to hold up, right? It'd have to be reproducible of course. But yeah no you, if you dealt with somebody else's data your career is over. But if you come up with your own new thing that just can stand alone and explain everything else, yeah somebody do that.

So I don't think there's any chance that scientists haven't looked at it thoroughly and they're the right people to look at it and they just haven't found no correlation. So anything you see on the internet that says there is a correlation is, I would bet, well you can't really bet on it because nobody will ever agree on the conclusion ever, anytime.

All right. So let me ask you this. If sunspots are the cause then they should be able to predict, isn't that right? Because can't we predict sunspots or am I wrong about that? So you should be able to make a sunspot related prediction about what the climate will be doing in five years that would be more accurate than the IPCC. And if you could do that then maybe you'd have something. But I wouldn't worry that that's likely. I would say the least likely of all the possibilities is that sunspots are doing it and science hadn't noticed. It's the least likely possibility. But maybe, you know, anything's possible.

The mini ice age, the Maunder minimum, yeah none of that's real. All of that stuff's been studied and debunked thoroughly. There's no money tied to sunspots but there is, I just told you there is. If an individual scientist or a team of them could prove that the sunspots were the real cause of climate change they would be rich. If you doubt that you don't understand anything about anything. But the study would have to hold up. I mean that's the catch, right? If they just say it's true and it isn't you don't have much there.

Yeah, the worst phrase ever is "the science says" because science doesn't say anything. People say stuff and the news tells you stuff but science actually is silent.

Yeah I know somebody says there's no money in fixing it if it doesn't exist but that doesn't change the fact that the scientist would still have a huge financial incentive to find that sunspots were the real reason if they were. So you should assume they're not.

All rig