Climate Bet For Charity

UPDATE: 12 JAN 2020: Payment (in euros!)


UPDATE 27 NOV 2020: We have a new bet:

UPDATE 19 NOV 2020:

Will  the next 2011-2020 decade be warmer than the previous 2001 – 2010 decade?


NTZ and cool readers are are pledging money and betting it will be cooler, or the same.

Warm readers, led by Rob Honeycutt, say it will be warmer, and so far have pledged $5200 on it.

We are now trying to get as many pledges for money as we can. The loser of the bet will have to pay the amount pladged to a charity for children in dire need, such as Children Hospice International or Doctors Without Borders.

So far NTZ and cool readers have pledged over $2,000 (10  Jan 2011), betting the next decade will be cooler. If the bet were decided today, then the loser would have to pay this amount to the charity (which has not been chosen yet).

Do you want to join the bet? Pledge an amount!

The bet

If the decade of 2011 – 2020 is cooler or the same on average globally than the decade of 2001 – 2010, then warmist Rob Honeycutt and warmist betters will have to pay to charity the total amount that gets pledged by NTZ and readers betting on a cooler decade.

If the average global temperature for the decade 2011 – 2020 is warmer than the average of 2001 – 2010, then NTZ and coolist readers will have to pay everything they pledged to the charity.

Where, when and how do I bet?

You can bet simply by leaving a reader comment below telling how much you want to put down. I will then put your username and email address and amount on a list. I’ll be posting the updated list from time to time (without your e-mail address of course).  Please make your pledges before October 1, 2011.

Which dataset will decide the bet?

It has been agreed to use a composite of RSS and UAH lower troposphere temperature – close to the earth’s surface. The result will be accepted without quibbling, as it is agreed that it’s the best we’ve got. The average of the two will decide the bet!

How and when do I pay if I lose?

Payment will be made when the bet is settled, i.e. January, 2021, or possibly earlier if it’s clear who the winner will be, but only with mutual agreement. If us coolists lose, then they will have to pay what we pledged directly to the yet-to-be-chosen charity organisation. You will be asked to pay when the bet is settled, i.e. January 2021.


As mentioned above, the charity organisation is yet to be chosen, but will (1) be one that both sides agree on, (2) help children in dire need (3) have low overhead and (4) be international.

What happens if the loser doesn’t pay?

If the loser of the bet refuses to pay, then he will be forever regarded as a useless deadbeat loudmouth scumbag with no honour. We have a bucket of hot tar and a sack of feathers ready.

How will we control if someone pays?

I’m keeping a list, and somehow we will get a statement from the charity organisation confirming that payment was indeed made.

What if something happens to me and I can’t pay?

Not your fault. You’ll be simply taken off the list and you will be remembered as a generous and honourable person.

So please pledge a nominal amount!

I hope that more readers here will pledge some money for this bet. Again it would be nice to have the warmists pay the full $5200 they’ve pledged thus far. Right now us coolists have about $2000, and so we need to get more coolist bets. Minimum bet is $10.

Minimum age?

You have to be 18 or older.

So what is it going to be? Cooler, or warmer?

(Last updated 10 Jan 2011)

107 responses to “Climate Bet For Charity”

  1. David Johnson

    Put me down for $20

    1. David Johnson

      Oops! $20 for a cooler decade that is
      PG: Thanks!

  2. Viv Evans

    Pierre, another $50-00 from me – for the cool side.

    Betting on cool is cool, no?
    PG: You’re cool for pledging, and betting on cool is cool. Thanks Viv – you’re on the cool list and will appear in the next update.

  3. grayman

    Pierre, I am going to start telling the other blogs i visit to come over and join in on the fun. I am sorry but i do not know how to link to your site but i will tell them to come on over as fast as my two fingers can do the dance on the keyboard.

  4. Rob Honeycutt

    What’s all this $20 stuff! Come on people, either you believe this or not.

    I get the feeling people are putting money down on the off chance there will be cooling.

    1. NeilM

      What’s all this $20 stuff! Come on people, either you believe this or not.

      Believe! – surely not Rob.
      Isn’t it about weighing up the evidence and coming to a rational conclusion?

  5. leo meyer

    What happens if the decades are either equally warm or we have contradicting outcomes in the report?

    1. Rob Honeycutt

      I wouldn’t worry about it too much. You guys are not going to win this one. 😉

  6. sacculina

    $200 (US or Canadian)
    That the planet is going to be warmer on average in the next decade (2011-2020) than 2001-2010. Sadly, and unsually, a bet that I do not wish to ‘win’. My preferred charity is Medecins Sans Frontiers.

    1. NeilM

      Sadly, and unsually, a bet that I do not wish to ‘win’.

      My feelings as well – except I bet on the cool side.

      I guess it depends on where you live and how much it costs to heat your home. 😉
      There’s also the rising cost of food to consider as reduced growing seasons affect crop yields etc.

  7. T. G. Watkins

    Sorry Rob. H it’s not personal. I never bet, not even on certainties. This is very unfair on you and your chums but, at least, it is for a good cause.
    If I’m allowed a general comment on the chosen charity, much as I admire medical colleagues who devote their careers to helping a small number of individuals it is clear that the greatest benefit comes from public health improvements i.e. clean water, sanitation and nutrition.
    Ultimately, a charity which educates and liberates women would be my choice but none exists in the places that need it.
    I pledge $100. win or lose! ( but R. H. pays as well if it is cooler)
    Great fun if it weren’t for the windmills etc. as time will clearly tell.
    Regards, TGW.
    PG: Thanks! It’s for a good cause…I think our chances are good. I’ll ut you down on the list, and will appear in the next update.

  8. Bill Dawson

    Up my bet from $5 to $50.

    Bill Dawson
    703 255 7053
    PG: Thanks Bill! Will appear in the next update.

  9. soilpest

    I’m in for $50.00 on the coolist side.
    PG: Thanks soilpest. You’ll appear on the list in the next update ina few days.

  10. William Yarber

    I’m in for $250.00 on the cool side. Please contact me at my email address if you need additional information.
    PG: Yeah! Thanks. I’ll put you down on the list and you’ll appear in the next update. Right now I have your e-mail address, and that’ll do for now. We’re gaining on the warmists.

  11. PJ

    $250 for another decade of cooling (the trend is your friend!). I’m guessing that in 10 years $250 will be about the cost of a deli sandwich.
    PG: Thanks…the odds that it will be that devaluated are far greater than the IPCC warming scenarios coming true. You’re on the list and an update will appear in a few days.

  12. Rob Honeycutt

    I’m looking forward to the next update to see where we stand!

    1. Charles Zeller

      Rob, I’ll accept the risk of a Krakatoa scale eruption, and double your stake on the “warmist” side of the bet (There might be a confused other Rob Huneycutt who I just contacted via Facebook.)

      Mr. Gosselin, As a show of good faith I just donated half of the “wager” ($2,500) to Doctors Without Borders which I expect to be quickly matched by “coolist” pledges. The “warmers” are now up to $10,200. (Come on readers. 🙂

      Your site’s civility is refreshing, and your charity of choice is worthy of support by all. I’ll send you the donation receipt if you send me an email address.

      Charles Zeller

  13. Stephen Hayward

    Put me down for $200 for another decade of cooling.
    PG: You got it…you’re on the list and will show up in the next update. And you are right in saying “another decade of cooling”. Temps peaked in the late 90s, and are now gradually trending downwards. Problem with the warmists is that they like looking at charts upside down. Thanks for the pledge, Stephen.

  14. Scrooge

    New to site but please put me down for 50 usd. It will be warmer. I really don’t expect to lose but if I’m still around contact me anyway win or lose because they are good charities.
    PG: Thanks! You’re on the list.

  15. Adrian Smits

    You can put me down for 200 dollars on the cool side! This is like shooting fish in a barrel. Starting the decade with a la nina has got to give the edge to the cool side.

  16. Eric Logan

    $ 100 wager to charity that the next decade will be cooler.
    PG: – Thanks – you’re on the list you will appear in the next update.

  17. Adrian Smits

    200 hundred dollar wager to charity that the next decade will be cooler than the last decade.After all it was the war-mist in a thousand years. How could it repeat?
    PG: Thanks Adrian, you will appear on the next list in the next update. Also read the latest post!You’re already on the list. Do you wish to double?

  18. soilpest

    You can up my bet to $200 for the coolist side

  19. Brian H

    $500 on cooling. I don’t expect it to be close.

    If I’m losing, I’ll start saving in advance. But I have no worries.

    Hope my health holds for the decade! I’ve reached the age where there’s no reasonable assurance of that. 🙂

    1. Brian H

      A month since the last update. What’s the score? 😉

    2. Brian H

      Where’s the first list link? I don’t see it anywhere.

  20. Harry Kal

    I bet the next decade will be cooler.
    For $100 USD.


  21. Villabolo

    Why was March 1, 2011 chosen as the cut off date for pledges?

    Surely you can extend to December of 2011.

  22. matthu

    I am on the cool side – put me down for $100.

  23. E. Beaver

    $25 says cool

  24. chris y

    Put me down for US $100 for the cool side. Doctors without borders is my preferred charity if I need to pay.

  25. Jon Torrance

    I’m in for $500 on the warm side.

    BTW, it’s been nearly 6 months since the last update and the last three months have been warmer than the 2001-2010 average. Better do an update once the September numbers are in – leave it too long after that and the warm side might be in the lead. Likely not, given the recent return to La Nina conditions, but I think we can safely assume La Nina won’t last forever.

  26. Dr Norman Page

    Is it too late to join? If not put me down for $100 on the cool side.

  27. Berynn Schwerdt

    With 8 years to go, I don’t think it is at all clear just from the stats which way the current decade will land. I like your idea of expressing difference of opinion by pledging for charities, so why not keep the betting open (to 2015) and give them as much as possible?

    Will you allow a $100 pledge from me for a warmer decade?

  28. Harold Faulkner


    People in the USA, are being told by the government and media that global warming is man-made. If that is true, how can the government and media explain the high temperatures the earth has experienced in past years? Let us look back in the world’s history: for example, between roughly 900AD and 1350AD the temperatures were much higher than now. And, back then there were fewer people, no cars, no electric utilities, and no factories, etc. So what caused the earth’s heat? Could it be a natural occurrence? The temperature graph at the bottom of this article shows the temperatures of the earth before Christ to 2040.

    In the book THE DISCOVERERS published in February 1985 by Daniel J. Boorstin, beginning in chapter 28, it goes into detail about Eric the Red, the father of Lief Ericsson, and how he discovered an island covered in green grass.

    In approximately 983AD, Eric the Red committed murder, and was banished from Iceland for three years. Eric the Red sailed 500 miles west from Iceland and discovered an island covered in GREEN grass, which he named Greenland. Greenland reminded Eric the Red of his native Norway because of the grass, game animals, and a sea full of fish. Even the air provided a harvest of birds. Eric the Red and his crew started laying out sites for farms and homesteads, as there was no sign of earlier human habitation.

    When his banishment expired, Eric the Red returned to congested Iceland to gather Viking settlers. In 986, Eric the Red set sail with an emigrant fleet of twenty-five ships carrying men, women, and domestic animals. Unfortunately, only fourteen ships survived the stormy passage, which carried about four-hundred-fifty immigrants plus the farm animals. The immigrants settled on the southern-west tip and up the western coast of Greenland.

    After the year 1200AD, the Earth’s and Greenland’s climate grew colder; ice started building up on the southern tip of Greenland. Before the end of 1300AD, the Viking settlements were just a memory. You can find the above by searching Google. One link is:

    The following quote you can also read about why there is global warming. This is from the book EINSTEIN’S UNIVERSE, Page 63, written by Nigel Calder in 1972, and updated in 1982.

    “The reckoning of planetary motions is a venerable science. Nowadays it tells us, for example, how gravity causes the ice to advance or retreat on the Earth during the ice ages. The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the Solar System, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons. Every so often a fortunate attitude and orbit of the Earth combine to drench the ice sheets in sunshine as at the end of the most recent ice age, about ten thousand years ago. But now our relatively benign interglacial is coming to an end, as gravity continues to toy with our planet.”

    The above points out that the universe is too huge and the earth is too small for the earth’s population to have any effect on the earth’s temperature. The earth’s temperature is a function of the sun’s temperature and the effects from the many massive planets in the universe, i.e., “The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the Solar System, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons.”
    Read below about carbon dioxide, which we need in order to exist. You can find the article below at:


    Of the 186 billion tons of carbon from CO2 that enter earth’s atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth’s oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.

    At 380 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth’s atmosphere–less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth’s current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

    CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life– plants and animals alike– benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.

    CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there, but continuously recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth’s oceans– the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.

    If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions and all other government proposals and taxes would have a negligible effect on global climate!

    The government is lying, trying to use global warming to limit, and tax its citizens through “cap and trade” and other tax schemes for the government’s benefit. We, the people cannot allow this to happen.

    If the Earth’s temperature graph is not shown above, you can see this temperature graph at the link:

  29. Jules Dingle

    $200 for a warmer decade

    proceeds to Doctors without Borders

    Jules- UK [US $]

  30. David Flick

    If it’s not too late to join, put me down for $100 for a cooler decade.

  31. David Flick

    Thanks, but it was worth a try. Tell you what, though, if we should happen to lose, which I’m confident that we won’t, I’ll still contribute $100.00 to the the pot…

  32. Mike Haseler (Scottish Sceptic)

    I would strongly suggest that rather than “warmer” or “cooler” the appropriate bet would be “nearer to no warming than the mid point of the IPCC prediction.

    At the very least it should be closer to no warming than the lower limit of the IPCC prediction which from 2001 has been the midpoint between 0.14C/decade and 0.0C/decade.

  33. Freddie Stoller

    Is there any chance to update? Seems to me that the last update was more than a year ago. Thanks 4 everything. Fred

    1. nzrobin
  34. Rick W

    Why is the betting closed now? Surely as the decade goes on it will be more evident that global warming is nonsense so why not allow the bet to show how views are changing based on what is being measured rather than the propaganda of the IPCC.

  35. Russell Seitz

    Put me down for $100 on the warm side– In my experience of South Asia, you cant lose betting on Medicins sans frontiers !

  36. Desertphile

    Why did none of you anti-science clowns take my US$1,000 wager? For the past four years I had a US$1,000 wager that backed the proposition that by end of year 2016 there would be a new record high global average temperature— and I offered that wager to many thousands of deniers: none of you clowns would accept the wager. This showed you don’t believe what you claim to believe.

    I pledge here and now US$1,000 on the proposition that the decade of the 2010s will be warmer than the decade of the 2000s. The 2000s was 14.56c, and so far this decade is +0.06c warmer. The 2010s will be about +0.16c warmer than the 2000s.

    Mark me done for $1,000 on the pro-evidence, pro-reality, pro-science side.

    1. DirkH

      Desertphile 8. February 2015 at 15:40 | Permalink | Reply
      “Mark me done for $1,000 on the pro-evidence, pro-reality, pro-science side.”

      Evidence shows no warming over 16 to 18 years, steeply rising CO2.
      Science tells us that when modeling a chaotic system with an iterative model of finite resolution, one gets an error that grows exponentially over time.

      So, you bet on no warming?

      1. Desertphile

        “Evidence shows no warming over 16 to 18 years, steeply rising CO2.”

        Is this meant as a joke?

        1. DirkH

          No. You haven’t ever looked at the evidence? Well, sometimes one forgets the simplest things, no probs.

          1. Desertphile

            Please look at the temperature anomaly for the entire planet: that is what this wager is about. I assume you believe the wager is about one portion of the warming planetary systems.

            This decade, even though only four years in to it, is already warmer than the previous decade. Paranoid conspiracy alarmists are, in this comment section, stating they will wager against an event that has already happened. That is not the behavior of sane human beings.

          2. AndyG55

            “Please look at the temperature anomaly for the entire planet”

            So you mean we use UAH or RSS, and not GISS or HadCrut.?

            Did you know that a ZERO trend is statistically supportable in RSS for 25.5 years?

          3. AndyG55

            And that RSS has a negative trend for 15 years?

            And that 2014 was the 6th warmest in the RSS record.

            Did you know that USCRN is COOLING at the rate of 0.5ºC/decade since it was established in 2005?

            These are the REAL statistics that you are up against.

            And with the sun having a snooze, you are going to look VERY foolish ! 🙂

        2. AndyG55

          “Is this meant as a joke?”

          Yes, “climate science™” is a joke.

          Yep, and you have fallen for it hook line and sinker. !

      2. Desertphile

        “So, you bet on no warming?”

        No, my pledge is on the side of the evidence and therefore the world’s scientists. US$1,000. It is the same amount I have been trying to give away for over four years, but no denier would accept the wager.

        1. DirkH

          “On the side of the evidence” is an idiotic statement to make. Who told you to speak in idiotic terms? Ask him for a refund.

          You have to specify whether you take the zero temperature trend of the past 18 years as the model that you expect to describe the future. Please learn to express yourself in an unambiguous way.

          1. Desertphile

            “‘On the side of the evidence’ is an idiotic statement to make.”

            Yes, people who lack evidence for their beliefs will indeed insist the statement is idiotic. So?

            My wager is US$1,000 on the proposition every climatologist and physicist in the world backs, and all of the evidence backs. It is the same US$1,000 that I have help in escrow for the past five years that I have offered to anyone and everyone if they would put up their US$1,000 on the contrary proposition.

            For five years I offered US$1,000 on the proposition that a new record high global average temperature would be set by end of year 2016. I offered the wager to tens of thousands of deniers, and NONE OF YOU CLOWNS WOULD ACCEPT THE WAGER. This showed that deniers do not believe what they assert.

          2. Mike Haseler

            I’m willing to bet for warmer/cooler on the next decade (2014-2024) what odds are you giving since you are so confident?

        2. AndyG55

          Are you in contact with Gavin, by any chance?

          .. a rigged bet, is never a true bet.

          And we have seen how much past temperatures have been “adjusted” downwards.

    2. AndyG55

      “Mark me done for $1,000 on the pro-evidence, pro-reality, pro-science side”

      Oh, so you are betting its going to cool.?

      Because that is where the evidence is pointing.

  37. Desertphile

    > From UAH:
    > (root@localhost) [test]> select truncate(year/10,0)*10 as D,avg(anom)
    > from uah_globe group by D;
    > +——+———————+
    > | 1970 | -0.178461536908379 |
    > | 1980 | -0.144666666459913 |
    > | 1990 | -0.0388333334121853 |
    > | 2000 | 0.142833333369344 |
    > | 2010 | 0.243333335500211 | +——+———————+
    > 4 times out of 4 for the TLT. The old induction rule says prob
    > is then (4+1)/(4+2) = 83%.
    > From NASA’s LOTI:
    > +——+———+
    > | 1970 | 0.3417 |
    > | 1980 | 18.7167 |
    > | 1990 | 32.2833 |
    > | 2000 | 52.1333 |
    > | 2010 | 55.6897 | +——+———+
    > 4 times out of 4 for surf temp. Another 83%.
    > 83%*83% gets 97%

    Deniers are claiming they will wager money against a proposition that has already happened and is happening at p=0.97 and that behavior amazes me. I also find that behavior spooky.

    1. AndyG55

      um, did UAH temps exist in 1970?

      And with Hansen then Schmidt throwing a bucket of ice on anything before 1980..

      get serious….your scam is not going to work, little child. !

  38. Desertphile

    Why has no one contacted me to confirm my pledge?

  39. Desertphile
  40. Desertphile


    1. DirkH

      Hi, desertphile.
      Nobody interested in weather bets?

    2. Mike Haseler

      Since you are so confident I presume you will be willing to accept higher odds for warming such as 4:1 over the next decade.

      1. Mike Haseler

        As odds were never my strong point. You bet $1000 I bet $250. Winner takes all. Or perhaps $4000 and $1000?

  41. Db


    You do realize this bet you keep chiming in on about is 1..too late, and 2 doesn’t comport at all to what was said here.

    Being as La Nina is coming as well if you wish to bet in the same way this bet was wagered:

    2004-2014 vs 2014-2024

    I would be happy to match and exceed your “bet” of 1k dollars. I will do 1500 dollars to the charity of your choice with a receipt and expect the same from you.

    The bet will use the UAH RSS composite, the same as the current bet.

    I’d feel bad if I didn’t tell you, you realize right now the “coolists” are winning this bet 4 years in, by a decent bit on a composite index. These are the most accurate indices we currently have, and I will not have your scamming as you seem to wish to do. So it will be as straightforward as that. Exact same terms as the bet negotiated here long ago, just fast forward four years. That is plain and simple, even for you.

    Put up or shutup.

  42. Db

    With the one change of being as 2014 is past, it would be 2015-2025, all future events with the exception of a few months.

  43. douglas nusbaum

    coolists torture language:

    If the decade of 2011 – 2020 is cooler or the same on average globally than the decade of 2001 – 2010, then warmist Rob Honeycutt and warmist betters will have to pay to charity the total amount that gets pledged by NTZ and readers betting on a cooler decade.

    If the average global temperature for the decade 2011 – 2020 is warmer than the average of 2001 – 2010, then NTZ and coolist readers will have to pay everything they pledged to the charity.

    Already this decade is .07 degrees WARMER than the previous decade. The rate of warming may not be as fast, but this decade is definitely warmer.
    If the bet is that this decade will be warmer than put me down for $100. If this bet is that the rate of warming will be greater, than I will not bet.

    The problem is that coolists lie and distort language. On this site

    the claim is that the two trends are close. They are not. What is close is the rate of warming. I will not bet on the rate of warming. I will bet the $100 on this decade being warmer than the previous decade.

    So which is it?

    1. Robin Pittwood

      On 9 April 2015 you wrote ‘The problem is that coolists lie and distort language’ and you included a link to my blog, Kiwithinker. Let me assure I do my best to be truthful and clear – and so I’ll explain further to clear up any confusion. So let’s pick up the main points:
      You said ‘Already this decade is 0.07 degrees WARMER than the previous decade’. That doesn’t look right to me. So let’s calculate the average temperature for the past decade (Jan 2001 to Dec 2010), and for as much of the current decade as was available at the date of your comment, 9 April 2015, (Jan 2011 to Mar 2015).
      The average of RSS and UAH monthly readings, from Jan 2001 to Dec 2010, the 10 year average temperature anomaly is 0.2014C. At the time you wrote your comment the period Jan 2011 to Mar 2015, 51 months, is as much of ‘this decade’ as we had available. The average of RSS and UAH monthly readings over that 51 month period is 0.1550C. So, at the time of your comment, the current decade (Jan 2011 to Mar 2015) was actually 0.0464 degrees COOLER than the average of the previous decade.
      You mentioned ‘rate of warming’. As far as I recall I have not mentioned ‘rate of warming’ and so I suspect you might have misunderstood what the graph shows. The graph is an accumulating average. It is simply a way of looking at progress toward an average before all the numbers are in. There are 120 months in a decade, ie: there are 120 numbers to add and divide by 120. It is boring waiting, so rather than waiting for the 120 numbers, add and then divide, I have graphed an accumulation of each monthly number divided by 120. The sum of these, which is the end point of the graph, is the 10 year average. The numbers are all in for the previous decade, and the final number is 0.2014C, the overall average for that decade.
      And finally, as I understand it, Pierre and Rob have agreed that the bet is based on the 10 year average temperature, of the average UAH and RSS global monthly temperature anomaly, of the two decades 2001 to 2010 and 2011 to 2020.

  44. barry

    Comparisons with anomaly data up to June 2016:


    2001 – 2010 av = 0.262658
    2011 – Jn 2016 = 0.272591


    2001 – 2010 av = 0.140017
    2011 – Jn 2016 = 0.175894

    Question: UAH and RSS undergo version changes (UAH recent revision 6 – still in peer review – mainly resulted in decreasing TLT trend since 2001).

    I expect it has been decided to use whatever current version for both is up and running at the time the bet is settled. Is that the case?

    As there is so much snipe on global temp records, I wondered if some people might try to use that as an out clause should a revision change at the 11th hour swing the results the other way than before the revision. Has this factor been settled?

  45. Hebergement web

    From there Pierre posted the bet on his website. Eventually, the climate realists raised upward of $10,000 in “realist” bets, and contrarians raised something around half of that for the “contrarian” position.

  46. Desertphile

    I am still waiting for someone to accept my US$3,000 wager. Still no takers. Gosh, I wonder why?

    The anti-science lunatics refused to accept my US$1,000 wager even after an entire decade of my $1,000 sitting in escrow waiting for any hysterical paranoid conspiracy alarmist to step forward and accept my wager. Will they spend the next four years hiding from my $3,000 wager? I bet they will.

  47. darcy

    Looks to me like the downward revision of UAH and upward revision of RSS canceled each other out, and we’re more or less back to where we would have been without any changes.

    The “warmists” are now virtually certain to win this bet. Here’s why:

    (1) The average for the previous decade was 0.243. The average so far this decade (78 months) is 0.320. In order for the “coolists” to win, the remaining 42 months need to average below 0.100. In other words, the next 42 months need to be at least 0.22 cooler than the previous 78 months.

    (2) There has never been a period in the satellite record where 42 months were anything remotely close to 0.22 cooler than their preceding 78 months. The closest we’ve seen to this was with the eruption of Pinatubo (cooling of 0.077 over 42 months) and the 2008/2010 La Ninas (cooling of 0.064 over 42 months). Those are still about 3x smaller than the change that would be required for the “coolists” to win this bet. So, historically, even a large volcano or a double La Nina hasn’t come close.

    tl;dr — the “warmists” are going to win now, even if we have a big volcano or big La Nina.

    “Coolists” had better start putting aside some money to pay up when December 2021 rolls around.

    “Warmists” had better start practicing how to be gracious in victory.

    1. darcy

      Er, make that “pay up when January 2021 rolls around” not December. Thanks.

  48. David R

    Looks like the website ‘kiwithinker’, which showed the progress of this bet, has vanished.

    As it stands, and using kiwithinker’s method of comparing the accumulating average, at month 98/120 (Feb 2019) the previous decade anomaly was +0.191 C and the current decade anomaly is +0.298 C.

    We must be approaching the point at which the chances of the previous decade being warmer than the current one are statistically remote.

    1. Yonason

      “Looks like the website ‘kiwithinker’, which showed the progress of this bet, has vanished.” – David R

      Not as of when I went there, immediately before posting this.

      Maybe temporarily down for some reason when you checked?

      (site seems to have last been posted to “on January 3, 2018 by Anthony.” And there are comments to it, so he is getting traffic.

      1. David R


        Thanks. It was definitely down for a while. Possibly a service update?


        1. Yonason

          Is this what you got?

          “The connection has timed out

          The server at is taking too long to respond.”

          That happened to me earlier as I was scrolling down the page of one of his posts, and so I tried again just now, and it happened again as I was reading the post. Server issue?

  49. Jake

    So have yall paid up yet? Last 5 years have been the hottest 5 on record, pretty much statistically impossible for you to win at this point.

  50. braden

    How’s the bet going? Aren’t we getting close to the end? Who’s ahead now?

Leave a Reply

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy