It looks like everyone agrees with me!

Nobody wants to challenge my views. I offered 14 $1M bets, lowered the minimum to $200K, but still no takers! Side-pool is >100:1 betting with me. But now I have a new option.

I currently have 14 open $1M bets, but no takers.

\What does that tell you? It tells you that MIT was wrong: I’m not such a big misinformation spreader after all!

The side pool bets are running over 100:1 with me vs. against me (view the side-pool here).

So all the evidence on the table is that there is massive support that I’m telling the truth.

Why people aren’t accepting my money

There are 5 reasons for not accepting any of my bets:

1. They think it’s a scam.

2. They aren’t expert enough to argue against me

3. They know I’m right

4. They think I’m wrong but are too lazy to assemble $200K to bet against me

5. They agree with me on every point I offered a bet on, but disagree with me on other scientific issues.

6. Too much cognitive dissonance would be created if the answer was determined

Regarding the first point, do your research. I never joke about this stuff. I’m legally on the hook here. I do a lot of research on things I bet on. I have things like science, facts, and evidence on my side. I have never lost a bet that has been adjudicated by an independent panel. I only bet large sums on things I’m confident I’m right about. So now that you know all that, you can’t say it is scam. It’s a scam if I didn’t disclose all that.

The second reason is what I hear all the time.

Three and four and six are self-explanatory.

Five is legitimate. So I created a new option where we flip the offer so anyone can propose to prove that I’m wrong.

You can double your money in as little as 30 days. Who wouldn’t want to do that?

Introducing a new option: you can now propose a bet to me!

I’ve just added a new option to the term sheet and Acceptance form.

If you think I’ve got it wrong on ANYTHING related to COVID, you can now propose a bet on a topic of your choice.

You must be prepared to wager at least $200K. If I accept in 10 days, it’s legally binding on both parties.

You should only challenge me on things you disagree with me on.

We’ll shortly see if anyone disagrees with me on anything COVID-related.

Here is the database with the acceptances/proposals.

It’s currently blank.

If you want to challenge me, fill in the form: Acceptance form.

Rootclaim uses the same technique to find truth

It isn’t too surprising that there are no acceptances once there is financial risk. Money is a great way to quantify conviction.

Rootclaim offers a $100K bet to anyone who disagrees with their analysis. Like me, they use science to determine truth.

I spoke to the rootclaim founder, Saar Wilf, today; he’s a subscriber. He said they’ve never had anyone challenge any of their conclusions. I’m not surprised.

Check out their page on whether the virus came out of a lab or nature.

He offered the bet for the same reason I did: it provides a huge incentive for anyone to challenge them to correct their information. The fact that nobody challenges them is a tacit admission that rootclaim got it sufficiently right that no challenger is confident enough to risk losing money.

Summary

Finding truth on a scientific issue is hard. Take for example the question “Did the virus come from a lab or nature?” Scientists don’t agree.

But once we attach money and a fair process to resolve the dispute, we can very quickly get to closure as to which side is telling the truth.

Often we don’t even need a debate: if one side makes a legit offer and nobody from the other side is willing to accept, it’s more likely it is the proposer of the wager who is correct. This makes finding the truth teller quite easy. I can’t think of a single case where this didn’t work. Can you?

In my case, nobody is challenging me on any of the 14 topics I proposed.

What that tells me is this: people who disagree with me have no conviction in their beliefs; it’s a lot of talk, but near zero conviction.

In Texas, they have a term for that: