Continuing from Three views of sea ice. Well, tis now mid-June, so the futurology aspect of the prediction is closing rapidly. Or so you would have thought. I’ve just taken £50 against CR for the ice being below 4.735 (he gets the low side) or above 4.935 (I get the high side). But my principal debt on sea ice is failing to write anything more about it. so, to remedy that!
I was going to suggest that the most interesting way of doing the pool was via Intrade. Unfortunately their Arctic sea ice pool doesn’t look very interesting. The bet is “2010 greater than 2009″ and is trading at around 43%, and hasn’t had a trade in a while. Since I’d say ~50% is fair odds, neither buy nor sell is very interesting. Here is a pic:
I suspect that I might want to put in some “sell” bids at alower price but I’ve yet to work out exactly how that goes. Maybe later.
It is hard to deny that the current AMSR pic is looking bad for the good guys; but never mind. I’d stick with my old opinions for the moment (I mean, just look at the variability on that chart! One month is hardly a guide to the next) I ought to offer my apologies to those who suggest I look at some sea ice images: I’m afraid I haven’t found the time to do so and this largely reflects a lack of interest on my part; perhaps with a bigger computer and a faster internet connection I might. As it is, I’ll just have to go forward blind.
I thought I’d do a quick “news” search on sea ice and was pleased to find The Economist with a sensible story and, for a bonus, plugging my humble blog. I look forward to hordes of punters turning up with wads of cash ready to throw down. The Economist notes the Arcus sea ice outlook series, which in my mind is pegged as “not doing very well” in the last two years. However, they have learnt one thing from their disastrous May forecast of 2008 – don’t do a forecast in May :-). We’re waiting on the June forecast, which should be interesting.
While I’m here… another link worth reading is RMG’s take on “when will the Arctic first be ice free in summer”. I say worth reading, and I think it is, but I also think it is entirely wrong.
And for those who have forgotten the default bet, and can’t be bothered to read the old post, it is:
That the september mean ice *extent* be below 4.835; but with a “buffer” where we call it a draw: between 4.735 and 4.935, no one wins. I’m taking the “high” side of this; anyone interested in the “low” side let me know.