Durango Bill’s
Debunking the Deniers of Global Warming
Roger Cohen’s proposed $5,000 bet denying “Global Warming”
An example of
1)
A (retired) Exxon Mobil executive’s attempt to use money to promote his
personal agenda. (Which is to deny “Global Warming”.)
And
2) What appears to be biased reporting by a small town newspaper to further promote this denial agenda
Summary
On Jan. 26, 2008 the Durango Herald published a large front-page story
(Front page portion was 3 columns wide and over a foot long) describing
a “Global Warming” denial bet challenge by Roger Cohen. (A retired Exxon Mobil executive)
http://www.durangoherald.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=news&article_path=/news/08/news080126_3.htm
Apparently “Opinion articles” had been exchanged between Roger Cohen
and other parties on the Durango Herald’s Opinion Page (which is
where these arguments should have stayed), but on Jan. 26, 2008 the
Durango Herald published a large front page article that promoted Roger
Cohen’s agenda of denying “Global Warming”. The article included the
following statement by Mr. Cohen in regard to other posts that had
appeared on the Opinion Page.
“If they’re willing to write letters but
not bet, they shouldn’t be taken seriously.”
The top heading for the
front-page newspaper article was “No one warms to his challenge”
followed by a large picture of Mr. Cohen prominently holding a $5,000
check. A subtitle to the article stated “Durangoan willing to bet
$5,000 Earth won’t be hotter in 10 years”
Articles
that promote an individual’s agenda do not belong on the front page of
a newspaper. When a newspaper does this, it is biased reporting.
As for Roger Cohen (the retired Exxon Mobil executive), his behavior is
typical of past Exxon Mobil behavior. “Don’t bother us with the facts,
just use money to see if you can force a particular agenda.”
If an issue has merit, it should be supported by evidence; and
particularly, documentation of this evidence should be backed up by
references. For example, references should include Internet links
and/or research articles published in credible journals.
Instead of using evidence, Mr. Cohen’s modus operandi
(similar to Exxon Mobil) is to try to use money to force an issue. Mr.
Cohen’s motivation appears to be “I’m right because I can bet $5,000”.
Public policy regarding the causes and consequences of “Global Warming”
/ “Climate Change” should not be decided by bets by someone who has an
ego problem.
The Author’s Response to Roger Cohen’s Bet
I have sent E-mails to Roger Cohen and the Durango Herald indicating
that I would take the other side of the bet, but with conditions
attached. These conditions require that 1) the Durango Herald must give
equal newspaper space to evidence that “Climate Change” / “Global
Warming” is occurring, 2) the Durango Herald must allow me to copy
material that appears in the newspaper including posting the
information on Internet web pages, and 3) that 10-year averages are
used as a measure that “Global Warming” is taking place. The text of
Roger Cohen’s bet (as sent to me via an E-mail), and my response
follow.
Text of Roger Cohen’s Proposed Bet
A public wager on climate change
Herald readers have had the opportunity to discern the flimsiness of
the climate catastrophe case and to witness catastrophe advocates’
anger against those who disagree and their reluctance to debate
technical issues. If advocates remain confident of impending climate
catastrophe and firm in their belief that worldwide government
interventions are urgently needed, they will seize the opportunity I
offer here.
I offer a public wager of $5,000 that the Earth will be cooler in 10 years.
❂ The wager is open to one individual or group of individuals. If more
than one individual or group is interested, I will choose one and
notify the others.
❂ The determining metric will be simple:
whether the global average temperature for the year 2017 is higher or
lower than 2007, as determined by the authoritative “HadCRUT3” data
set (Climatic Research Unit, U.K.), or its successor.
❂ Funds will be deposited in an escrow account. Interest earned will be paid to the escrow agent.
❂ There will be a simple written agreement between the parties (I
will pay legal counsel to prepare), and the parties will sign an escrow
agreement relating to the deposited funds.
❂ My winnings will be donated to a local charitable organization promoting science education.
The wager is aimed at focusing attention on the critical issue: future
climate and our ability to predict it. The United Nation’s climate
panel relies on computer models for its projections and predicts that
the Earth will likely be warmer in 10 years. The wager involves actual
global climate data – no computer predictions, cherry-picked anecdotes,
appeals to “majority opinion,” distortions of fact, or unfounded
proclamations.
No excuses. If the amount is too high,
advocates can run a fundraiser. If it seems low, propose a different
amount. Want a different data set? Propose one. Trying to divert
attention to those “nasty energy companies” and similar smokescreens
will only emphasize the weakness of your position.
Parties
should respond by mail – P.O. Box 3162, Durango 81302 – within 20 days
of this publication. If no one responds by that time, there will be no
wager.
Roger W. Cohen, Durango
My E-mail Response
(Sent to both Roger Cohen and Dale Rodebaugh of the Durango Herald)
On
Jan. 26, 2008, the Durango Herald ran a front page story about a bet
offer by Roger Cohen under the story title “A chilly response”. I would
like to take the other side of Roger’s bet, but there would be some
conditions involved.
First, the temperatures of record must be
the 10 year averages from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies
for their “Global Temperature Land-Ocean Index”. (The front 10 years
would the 10-year average from 1997 to 2006 (up-to-date displayed data)
while the end 10 years would cover 2007 to 2016). Charts showing
the 5 year average temperatures for this index can be seen as the red
line at:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/and
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif2)
The Durango Herald must give me a written guarantee that it will give
me (or anyone that I chose as a delegate) equal coverage to Climate
Change evidence. In particular, this must include a front page story in
the Durango Herald that has the same size coverage as the “A chilly
response” article that the Durango Herald published on Jan. 26, 2008.
This coverage will be independent of any subsequent coverage of the bet
and must include a picture of the above graph. (And be of comparable
size.)
3) I regard Roger Cohen as an Exxon spokesman who is part
of the “Denial Machine”. I also think that the Durango Herald has been
very one-sided in its coverage of Roger Cohen’s assertions. If this
goes forward, I will also need written permission from both Roger Cohen
and the Durango Herald that I may use copies (without restriction) of
any material on this subject that may be printed in the Durango Herald.
This permission must also include allowing me to use the material as
part of Internet web pages. Internet web pages will be similar to a
page that I have already posted on the Internet.
“The Great Global Warming Swindle” is itself a Fraud and a Swindle
http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.htmlIf
these conditions are acceptable to both Roger Cohen and the Durango
Herald, it should be relatively simple to work out the rest of the
details. Note: I am perfectly willing to have my “winnings” (if I win)
also go to charities. (What would be funny is that there’s also a
remote chance that both Roger Cohen and I support the same charity.)
Update
as of 4 PM MST Jan. 28, 2008: Subsequent correspondence with
representatives from the Durango Herald indicates that they have a
long-standing policy that does not allow me or anyone else an
unrestricted right to copy their copyright material. Thus the
conditions for the bet from my side can not be fulfilled, and for my
part, the bet is no longer relevant.
The photograph to the right shows Roger Cohen prominently displaying
his tentative $5,000 check. It clearly illustrates what is most
important to Mr. Cohen. As per usual for Exxon Mobil executives (even
retired ones), it is an example of their attempts to use money to
promote an agenda - and bypass scientific accuracy in the process.
The original article in the Durango Herald appeared under the following headline: (Headline and photograph were 3 columns wide.)
A chilly response
Durangoan willing to bet $5,000
Earth won’t be hotter in 10 years
By Dale Rodebaugh
Herald Staff Writer
Note: The photograph is a copy of the photograph displayed at http://theclimatebet.com/category/roger-cohen/ . It was not copied from the Durango Herald’s website or from the original article that appeared in the Durango Herald. Click here to see the web version of the original Durango Herald article.
The graph above (from http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif
) shows actual historical world temperature anomalies as compiled by NASA’s
Goddard Institute for Space Studies. (The graph will be updated in
future years.) The graph shows what is really happening to world
temperatures.
The “Deniers” usually use “Cherry
Picked” local data that has been selective edited (or even outright
falsified) for their arguments, but it is important to remember that
“Global Warming” evidence is based on “Global Data”. If at any time
that a “Denier” shows a temperature chart as part of his assertions, it
is highly probable that it has been edited, culled, or otherwise
distorted such that it does not represent the true historical record.
If you restrict a temperature comparison to a single year vs. another
single year 10 years later as per Roger Cohen’s bet proposal, the short
term random variations (“noise” and “static”) will obscure the trend.
If you are going to use single years for comparison (not the world’s
best metric), then a much longer time period should be used. For
example, if Roger Cohen’s proposed bet used a 100-year time spread of
1909 vs. 2009; then the difference in the two temperatures would be
more representative. But then again, the “Deniers” aren’t
interested in the real trend. They are only interested in promoting
their own agenda.
Other publicity bets by the “Deniers”
Finally, it seems that betting that the earth will not undergo “Global
Warming” seems to be somewhat of a fad among the “Global Warming
Deniers”. If you run a Google search using <
“Global Warming” bet >, you will get hundreds of
thousands of hits. Apparently, the deniers believe that making lots of
noise and generating lots of controversy is a substitute for evidence.
Some examples of other publicity bets by the “Deniers”:
“Climate change sceptics bet $10,000 on cooler world”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/aug/19/climatechange.climatechangeenvironment
“Betting on Climate Change - It's time to put up or shut up - Ronald Bailey | June 8, 2005”
http://www.reason.com/news/show/34976.html
“A
professor at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School of business
has challenged Al Gore to a bet over global temperatures. The bet is
for $10,000”
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/06/global_warming_bet/
“If
you think it's a no-brainer that humans are causing catastrophic global
warming, here's your opportunity to earn an easy US $150,000.00!”
http://www.junkscience.com/videos.html (alternately http://ultimateglobalwarmingchallenge.com/ )
“Richard Lindzen's "Climate Bet"”
http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frsgc/research/d5/jdannan/betting.html
Typically these bets are rigged by the “Deniers” to give
themselves a huge advantage. For example, Richard Lindzen (above) wants
50 to 1 odds on the amount for his bet. As for the “junkscience.com”
bet,
“JunkScience.com, in its sole discretion, will determine the
winner, if any, from UGWC entries. All determinations made by
JunkScience.com are final.”
They of course will keep the $15 you as the
“sucker” forked over in order to enter the rigged bet. Then the “Deniers”
claim that they must be right as no one accepted their rigged bets.
OK
“Deniers”. How about a bet on a 100 year time interval? Let’s use the
100 year span from 1909 vs. 2009 as measured by the NASA GISS Land -
Ocean Index. And to make the stakes interesting, how about an even odds
bet for let’s say $1,000,000?
(Note:
The above “proposed bet” is presented as a parody. However, if Mr.
Cohen would really like to go out on a limb, and if a reliable third
party would like to run the operation, then the possibilities for a real bet exist.)
Also please see:
“The Great Global Warming Swindle” is itself a Fraud and a Swindle
Return to Durango Bill’s Home Page
Web page generated via KompoZer
