Airhead California organization promotes global warming with a "bounty"

Greg Jefford has claimed the reward. Here's what he sent to Truth Market:

"Provide verifiable evidence that significantly less than 95% of American scientists believe in the reality of Global Climate Change and that humans are a likely cause."

My question: "Where are the definitions of 'verifiable,' 'evidence,' 'significantly,' 'believe in,' 'reality,' 'Global Climate Change,' and 'likely cause'?

We already know from the Zimmerman survey in 2008 of 10,257 scientists with a participation rate of 30.7%, that 97% of a final 79 respondents believed that human activity could have an impact on a change in the global mean temperature. Compared to this, the Global Warming Petition Project has been signed by 31,487 American scientists (over 9,000 with a Ph.D.) who believe:

“There is no convincing scientific evidence that the human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth”.

1000% Increase In Four Year Old Arctic Ice | Real Science

Old ice in the Arctic is making a spectacular recovery. The amount of four year old ice (yellow) has increased by 10X since last September.

The ‘correlation is not causation’ hockey stick | Watts Up With That?

Mike Lorrey writes- PAY ATTENTION CLIMATE ALARMISTS:

The New Nostradamus of the North: Groundbreaking global warming research by a Boston University team

Led by BU biologist Abraham J. Miller-Rushing, the scientists analyzed weather data alongside men's winning times in the Boston Marathon from 1933 to 2004 and women's winning times from 1972 (when women first officially participated) to 2004. They found that a 1.8 degree F (1 degree C) increase in temperature slowed the winning time, on average, by 20 seconds for men and 21 seconds for women. Strong headwinds had a similar effect. But overall, the researchers found that warming trends did not seem to affect the winning times of the marathon between 1933 and 2004, likely because there is still large variation in marathon-day temperature over that period.