Let The Betting Begin! Other Blogs Following NoTricksZone’s Lead

Joe Romm wants to bet, too! (Photo credit: americanprogress.org)

A reader has pointed out that Rob Honeycutt and NoTricksZone appear to have started a trend: Climate Bets For Charity. Here at NTZ, the warmists have entered in a bet (for charity) with the coolists on whether the 2011-2020 decade will be warmer or cooler.

Climate Bet Of The Decade For Charity

Now other blogs are following. It’s the new motto now spreading in climate science:

Either put up, or shut up!”

The latest bet out there is from the outspoken Joe Romm of Climate Progress, who offers to bet Joe Bastardi on temperature and Arctic ice melt. Glad to see he wants to settle it that way, and not through a wrestling match (though the result may very well end up being the same).

Romm’s proposal is very similar to our bet here at NTZ.

In the temperature bet, Romm wants to use the 2000-2009 period instead of the 2001-2010, thus moving the high temperature year of 2010 into his column. His bet is also for charity and insists using the average of RSS and UAH – as we are doing.

But Joe Romm is adding an escape clause: If 2 Pinatubo-size volcanoes erupt, then the bet is off. Such confidence!

I haven’t checked to see what Joe Bastardi’s reaction is. I think he’ll accept both bets. Go for it Bastardi! Unfortunately it’s going to take 10 years to shut this Romm loudmouth up.

Joe Romm seems awfully cocky. I wonder if he has the guts to make a sea level bet. That’s the issue where warmist blow the most hot air, yet are most afraid of touching. What do you say Romm? 5 mm/year over the next decade? That’s way below what Gore and the PIK in Germany are forcasting.

Don’t hold your breath.

Another blog has also got into the climate betting for charity action, but on a more modest scale. Georg Hoffmann here is betting 100 € that 2011 Arctic sea ice extent will reach a record low (NSIDC). Also an attractive bet for coolists.

If all this keeps up, then it won’t be necessary to make up a global warming scare for redistributing global wealth. Looks like the betting is going to care of that itself.

20 responses to “Let The Betting Begin! Other Blogs Following NoTricksZone’s Lead”

  1. J Torrance

    “But Joe Romm is adding an escape clause: If 2 Pinatubo-size volcanoes erupt, then the bet is off. Such confidence!”

    What’s with the tone? Do you dispute that major volcanic eruptions can cause cooling or that they have nothing to do with the question of whether CO2 causes warming or not? As far as I know, Joe Romm has never claimed to be able to predict volcanic eruptions so I can’t imagine why you would expect him to confidently assume there won’t be two or more large ones in a decade.

    Will you be similarly disparaging about Bastardi’s confidence in his position if he refuses to take up the bet? As, based on what he’s written recently at The Blackboard, seems likely.

  2. Slimething

    So what’s the escape clause for coolists (to use your term)? It could just as easily be so said most of the warming trend of the last 18 years is due to a lack of volcano activity which is a part of the natural order of climate history. A large eruption is overdue as Joe Bastardi has noted.

    I went over to Lucia’s and invited Zeke to put his 10000 clams into your bet here but he has not responded. We shall see just how confident he is about
    AGW without resorting to statistical game playing and padding,

    1. J Torrance

      What known unpredictable natural phenomenon could cause a sudden significant warming comparable to the cooling large volcanic eruptions have been observed to cause? Or, in other words, what do coolists need an escape clause for? It’s not like each side has a quota to fill – you have to actually make a case for why an escape clause is justified.

  3. Rob Honeycutt

    When we set this up I thought long and hard about whether we should have a volcano escape clause. But my sense is that it would take 2, maybe even 3, well timed low latitude Pinatubo level events to overcome warming.

    See the global temperature chart and note 1991 and the years following…

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif

    Joe Romm also claims that it would take 2 Pinatubo events to nix the bet.

    It could happen but let’s let the cards fall where they may.

    1. Dana

      Rather irritating that Pierre refers to this as an ‘escape clause’ and says it shows a lack of confidence.

      Pierre, the issue at hand is whether or not humans are driving the global warming trend, is it not? We know that volcanoes can cause a significant short-term cooling effect, so if there are several large volcanic eruptions over the decade in question, then we cannot test the question.

      I also find it bizarre that you suggest Romm lacks confidence, and a few sentence later call him cocky. Which is it? Sure he’s cocky for the same reason that I am – Romm has a background in physics and has spent years learning about climate science. He’s confident because he knows what he’s talking about, unlike weatherman Bastardi. I’m sure Romm would engage in a sea level rise bet if one were offered.

  4. Rob Honeycutt

    And Romm offered up TWO bets. One on the coming decade’s average temperature and the other on Arctic sea ice extent.

    I don’t know but I think Romm seems pretty confident about his bets. Heck, a three-fer with sea level rise would be just too good!

    You also have to look at the escape clause that Romm is setting up. TWO Pinatubo level events in the decade! That would be statistically very unlikely to occur.

  5. mitchel44

    Steve Goddard says Mr Romm fails basic math, http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/01/18/romm-math-fail/

    “Romm makes a nearly incomprehensible bet :

    Let’s define “Ibet” as “the average of the Arctic sea ice extent minimum for the three years 2018-2020″ minus 4.6 million sq. km

    The bet again is that we each agree to donate money to the others designated charity using the following formula:

    Bastardi pays $1,000 minus [$1,000 times Ibet/2 Msqkm]. I pay $1,000 plus [$1,000 times Ibet/2 Msqkm].

    If there is no change in the sea ice extent minimum, we both pay $1000. If extent drops 2 million sq. km, then Bastardi pays $2000 and I pay zero. If extent grows 2 million sq. km, then I pay 2k and Bastardi pays zero. If extent grows 3 million sq. km, then I pay 3k and Bastardi pays zero. Again, being very wrong is doubly costly.

    http://climateprogress.org/

    If extent grows 3 million km^2, IBet = 3 million km^2. Using his formula, he pays $2500, not $3000 as he calculated.

    $1000 + ($1000 * 3,000,000/2,000,000) = $2,500″

  6. Villabolo

    “A reader has pointed out that Rob Honeycutt and NoTricksZone appear to have started a trend: Climate Bets For Charity. Here at NTZ, the warmists have entered in a bet (for charity) with the coolists on whether the 2011-2020 decade will be warmer or cooler.”
    . . .
    “Now other blogs are following. It’s the new motto now spreading in climate science:

    Either put up, or shut up!”

    ******************************************************

    And you’re not capable of doing either.

    ******************************************************

    “The latest bet out there is from the outspoken Joe Romm of Climate Progress, who offers to bet Joe Bastardi on temperature and Arctic ice melt. . . .”

    “Romm’s proposal is very similar to our bet here at NTZ.”
    . . .
    “But Joe Romm is adding an escape clause: If 2 Pinatubo-size volcanoes erupt, then the bet is off. Such confidence!”

    “I haven’t checked to see what Joe Bastardi’s reaction is. I think he’ll accept both bets. Go for it Bastardi! . . .”

    *******************************************************

    Update and reality check. Joe Bastardum has refused the bet. So the resounding echo still reverberates; “Put up or shut up!”

    It is also absurd to claim that two possible major volcanic eruptions should not be taken into account. In any case, all such eruptions would do is postpone the inevitable Death Spiral.

    *******************************************************

    “Joe Romm seems awfully cocky. I wonder if he has the guts to make a sea level bet. . . .

    Don’t hold your breath.”
    . . .
    *******************************************************

    The issue of sea level rise is a red herring.

    Most of the so called “hot air” (or warm water) has to do with the Arctic ice cap melt not sea level increase.

    *******************************************************

    “If all this keeps up, then it won’t be necessary to make up a global warming scare for redistributing global wealth. Looks like the betting is going to care of that itself.”

    *******************************************************

    The terrestrial dynamics of Global Warming have nothing to do with alleged redistribution of wealth.

    As for saying that Joe Romm (and company) is “cocky”, which is compounded by the self-assured (i.e. cocky) statement about the certainty of “skeptics” winning the bet, the ancient Greeks had a word for P Gosselin’s attitude.

    HUBRIS.