Al Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize

tellner

Senior Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,379
Reaction score
240
Location
Orygun
Pretty much what I'd expected. Someone to the left of Ivan the Terrible does something noteworthy. The Republican Lie Machine cranks up and begins its usual tired litany of slander, lies, personal destruction, hypocrisy and sour grapes. And it's the usual bankrupt stupidity. Where you can't attack the facts, drag the man through the sewer. Where you can't drag the man through the sewer accuse anyone who has anything good to say about his of being evil or stupid.

It would be funny if it weren't so tediously predictable.
 

Big Don

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
10,551
Reaction score
189
Location
Sanger CA
The nine alleged errors in the film
# Mr Gore claims that a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland "in the near future". The judge said: "This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr Gore's "wake-up call". He agreed that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water - "but only after, and over, millennia"."The Armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus."

# The film claims that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" but the judge ruled there was no evidence of any evacuation having yet happened.

# The documentary speaks of global warming "shutting down the Ocean Conveyor" - the process by which the Gulf Stream is carried over the North Atlantic to western Europe. Citing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the judge said that it was "very unlikely" that the Ocean Conveyor, also known as the Meridional Overturning Circulation, would shut down in the future, though it might slow down.

# Mr Gore claims that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said that, although there was general scientific agreement that there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts".

# Mr Gore says the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was directly attributable to global warming, but the judge ruled that it scientists have not established that the recession of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro is primarily attributable to human-induced climate change.
"Without diagnostic evidence, a definitive link to global warming is on thin ice," he said.
Another Actual Scientisthttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2337023.stm
# The film contends that the drying up of Lake Chad is a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming but the judge said there was insufficient evidence, and that "it is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability."

# Mr Gore blames Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans on global warming, but the judge ruled there was "insufficient evidence to show that".
Actual scientists don't agree with that load of bovine feces http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11661
# Mr Gore cites a scientific study that shows, for the first time, that polar bears were being found after drowning from "swimming long distances - up to 60 miles - to find the ice" The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm."That was not to say there might not in future be drowning-related deaths of bears if the trend of regression of pack ice continued - "but it plainly does not support Mr Gore's description".http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/0706_breen.pdf
# Mr Gore said that coral reefs all over the world were being bleached because of global warming and other factors. Again citing the IPCC, the judge agreed that, if temperatures were to rise by 1-3 degrees centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and mortality, unless the coral could adapt. However, he ruled that separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution was difficult.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/10/11/scigore111.xml
 

Ray

Master Black Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,391
Reaction score
53
Location
Creston, IA
And, the apparent sarcasm in your last paragraph, well, I'm just trying to reconcile that with you standing before your creator; 'Geesh, your Almighty, you gave us a nice planet, and we F'd it up. How was your day?'
Mr. Edward - Here's a public apology for me going off the deep end on Gore. He's been awarded the Nobel Prize for work in an area that may be very important in years to come. He's working for something he believes in and has brought important discussion and won convinced some others.

And now, because of your post, I had this dream of you and I standing before our Creator. Me trying to apologize and seek mercy for my comments and you repeating "I didn't know you were real." It was a tough dream to have considering I don't know you nor what you look like.
 

Cruentus

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 17, 2002
Messages
7,161
Reaction score
130
Location
At an OP in view of your house...
All this hoopla, and I can't help but wonder why Monks in Burma didn't win the prize, or another worthy canidate who's life is actually on the line for peace. Not that Gore shouldn't be recognized for his work or anything, but this is "peace" prize.
 

Sukerkin

Have the courage to speak softly
MT Mentor
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
15,325
Reaction score
493
Location
Staffordshire, England
Don could you supply the source you drew on for those 9 Supposed Errors in Al Gores work?

I ask only because it is not speculation about the shutdown of the Atlantic Conveyor - it's happened before (and it's stuttering right now). As a resident of one of the countries to benefit from the conveyor you can imagine that I have a greater interest than average in research on it's functioning :D.

We've been through this (to borrow Cruentus's word) word hooplah before so it's a bit fruitless to cover the same ground again. Global temperature fluctuations are a very real phenomenon that we're starting to get a handle on the pattern of. The impact of humankind on the global environment is likewise an implicated factor, even if only via an aggregation of our local effects. Not too many climatologists are currently sitting on the side of the naysayers, having shifted their views (like all good scientists do) as the evidence mounted.

We should be in a deepening ice age at the moment and, given that climate change can happen very rapidly indeed, there's no saying that the current warming trend will not turn out to be the trigger for a new glaciation cycle.

Regardless, we know what we don't know more than what we can prove at present. As such, to get out and push on a natural trend with our own activities is insane.

Then again, it's fairly moot as the magnetic pole shift is also underway and that we can't do anything about (which is why you don't hear much about it). Stock up on the factor 5000 rad-block suncream.
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
The British High Court judge ruled on Friday that Mr. Gore's movie was "broadly accurate" but contained nine "errors". The ruling was apparently based from a lawsuit one Stuart Dimmock to restrict the viewing of 'An Inconvienent Truth'.

The actual "errors" being referenced have to do with a British law (S407) that demands when an opinion is voiced, any countering opinion must be presented as well. So, the ruling specifically deals with British law, and not the actual science involved. After all, a judge is hardly the correct person to ask for scientific validation or discreditation.

This blog provided some interesting comments on the ruling. If one was inclined to read further on this matter.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/10/an_error_is_not_the_same_thing.php
 

Big Don

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
10,551
Reaction score
189
Location
Sanger CA
Don could you supply the source you drew on for those 9 Supposed Errors in Al Gores work?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/10/11/scigore111.xml

the judge ruled that the "apocalyptic vision" presented in the film was politically partisan and thus not an impartial scientific analysis of climate change. It is, he ruled, a "political film".
As far as Hurricane Katrina is concerned, the vast amount of damage was caused by the levies which had not been properly maintained in years, despite upstanding, responsible democrats being in office in Louisiana and New Orleans. That New Orleans flooded as badly as it did should surprise NO ONE! It's a PORT city that is mostly BELOW sea level, that in itself is the makings for disastrous flooding.
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
Back to the topic at hand ... well, not really.

http://borowitzreport.com/

Just days after former Vice President Al Gore received the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts on global warming, the United States Supreme Court handed Mr. Gore a stunning reversal, stripping him of his Nobel and awarding it to President George W. Bush instead.

For Mr. Gore, who basked in the adulation of the Nobel committee and the world, the high courts decision to give his prize to President Bush was a cruel twist of fate, to say the least.

But in a 5-4 decision, the justices made it clear that they had taken the unprecedented step of stripping Mr. Gore of his Nobel because President Bush deserved it more.

...
 

Sukerkin

Have the courage to speak softly
MT Mentor
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
15,325
Reaction score
493
Location
Staffordshire, England
Excuse me?!

There seems to be something wrong with my eyes. Either that or my irony filter is on the blink again.

If it was thought that the Peace Prize was inappropriate for a chap whose been working to bring the problem of Global Warming out of the closet, how on earth is it appropriate for the President Most In favour of Global War?

Sorry - I forgot. I'm not taking part in these non-martial related partisan arguments anymore. But that startled me so much I typed before I realised I was breaking my own injunction :eek:. Shh ... don't tell anyone :lol:.

PHEW: Irony filter working again after a whack with a hammer. Thank goodness :D. Sad indictment of how American politics is perceived outside of it's shores that I was nearly prepared to believe that was true ... until I read the article all the way down :lol:.
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
Eyes not deceiving.
Irony Filter must be on the fritz.
Borowicz is a relatively obscure comedian, but a comedian, none the less.

That his article could even be conceived is sadly relevant to the left right vitriol you drew attention to earlier on this thread.


And ... while many here may accuse me of encouraging that vitriol since joining this board in 2003, I will point out a couple of things ... first, I was country, when country wasn't cool. When President Bush has approval ratings at 97%, I was in the remaining 3%.

And there are Republicans for whom I have great admiration. I donated cash to the McCain (R-NV) '00 campaign. I donated cash to the '00 Hatch (R-UT) campaign. I would like very much for Senator Hagel (R-NE) to run this time.

Far be it from me to tell the Republican Party how to run their organization. But under Bush, Lott, Delay, Gingrich, Hastert, et al, they have been deserving of my vitriol.
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
The New York Times has finally killed there 'Times Select' portion of their web site. We can now read their Op-Ed columnists at no charge.

Mr. Krugman has some interesting observations here ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/opinion/15krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?

...

Which brings us to the biggest reason the right hates Mr. Gore: in his case the smear campaign has failed. He’s taken everything they could throw at him, and emerged more respected, and more credible, than ever.

An interesting recollection from Mr. Krugman. A different President Bush once referred to Mr. Gore as 'ozone-man'. His reference was derogatory in tone and intent.

I guess some things are hereditary.
 

tellner

Senior Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,379
Reaction score
240
Location
Orygun
It figures. The Rightwingnuts screech about "9 errors! 9 errors!" as if it were Gospel. And as if they weren't actively opposed to science as a concept. Then it turns out that their great British champion, the Goliath who took on Gore's David was *drumroll* a mining and fuel company magnate who has set up groups specifically to combat environmentalists.

It shouldn't even be close to surprising. If it interferes with making money it has to be lies and evil. If the truth is, hmm, "inconvenient" you need to slander the person who tells it. And if you don't like what someone says, then whatever he says must be wrong.

And people wonder why the Greedy Old Plutocrats (or is that Gay Old Pedophiles these days?) don't like the - and I quote directly - "reality-based community."
 

CoryKS

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
4,403
Reaction score
183
Location
Olathe, KS
lol. Good point. THey sort of lost credability when they gave one to Arafat!

Sort of? Man, the only thing that would make the Nobel Peace Prize worth anything would be if they printed it on two-ply.
 
Top