(Edit: I am not the user RatsWrongAboutUAP.)

I'm offering a new bet along similar lines to Yudkowsky's bet with the user RatsWrongAboutUAP in this thread last month. My bet has these similarities (here added explicitly after some confusion in the comments):

I will pay out immediately upon our agreement to the bet, whereas the other party only needs to pay out if and when they lose the bet. I am not requiring the other party to put their funds in escrow.
I am not asking for the other party to reveal private financial information (though doing so may allow me to give better odds than 150:1)
I am willing to make multiple bets with different people.
The odds I'm offering are 150:1.

My bet has these differences:

The time frame will be 3 years from the day the bet is agreed to.
The bet will resolve in my favor if a non-prosaic origin of the existing evidence, or new evidence, is confirmed in this time frame. Edit: the requirement of confirmation of evidence (by the same standards that Yudkowsky agreed to) applies both to existing evidence and any evidence that may emerge during the time interval.
My wager is $1000. If I make multiple bets, this will be the total wager.

EDIT: If you can document liquid assets, I will go down to 100:1. The limit to odds I will accept is at 75:1, but that would only be if the other wager was put in escrow.

I'd like to discuss details like credibility of payback, but first I want to see if there's any interest. My suspicion is that LW users are more afraid to make this bet now than they were in July, but we'll see.

ed65love

ed65love

ed65love

ed65love

ed65love

ed65love