Al Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize

[Curiosity]

I agree Tonington

It seems the stranglehold is working for the experts in the field - anxious not to upset people (whoever the people are in their world)....

I would hope some day all disciplines can submit their findings pro and con and get at least something from the experts for us to read and compare....

As you say this article is but one of hundreds to need to voice their opinion - it is only then we are going to be properly informed - whether we are in agreement with the final say or not.... there has to be some weight given to expectation by the people of the world.

They say we must change our habits, but give so many varied reasons, nobody listens any more. This award became another rock star extravaganza rather than the necessity the people must have something to plan for (or change for).

Writing about Cousteau yesterday brought me back to his determination and isolation while still achieving notoriety without all the phony glitter. Perhaps he was free from outside influences - I don't know.

PS: Now that I have some time on my side - my niece, her husband and I are going to be looking at a hybrid for me....not that I drive all that much but perhaps with a hybrid I might see more California than I have in a while.

 

[Tonington]

It's really bittersweet. I don't even know that more opinions will help. Theres enough of them out there for people to hear. Theres more than enough information for someone to read and get both sides and decide for themselves, but I think the problem is the deluge of information that exists. The varied opinions are confusing really. On a simple issue like at what level to stabilize at, if you search out information, you will get things like 90% of 1990, or 20% below 2005 levels, and so many other varied statistics. How does the public square that, when essentially, they are all saying the same thing, but with different stats? The irony is that almost all of those stabilization regimes are in the same ballpark for ghg concentrations, but it doesn't look that way to the public.

Is Gore now to be the ultimate stamp of approval? It seems he just might be.

Fella like Cousteau, gals like Goodall, and so many others...I think they are creatures of the past. Media demands such a price.

 

[MikeyDB]

Now I know this thread is all about Al Gore winning the Nobel Prize....

Is anyone here familiar with the Darwin awards?

If we focused our attention on who has done the most damage to planetary environment...who would it be?

Will the damage that Al Gore has done and will do.... amount to the same damage as say an entire population that's prepared to pave over paradise (to borrow from Joni Mitchell) and burn trillions of tons of fossil fuels to appease it's appetite for "four-wheel-freedom"?

Like many issues, the focus on Gore/Global Warming.....takes center stage while the discussion really needs to be acknowledging the many and varied facets of the pollution problem as a whole and seeking resolution to what any analysis could tell you is very nearly beyond control.....

 

[Niflmir]

I have a quote that Karrie wrote around here somewhere... and I think it applies here. I think we were talking about religion at the time and how people demonize the various supposed religious authorities. In any case, people seem to say: "I think you are not as good as me; I expect you to be better than me."

The media is easily able to make anyone seem so utterly human; we seem to demand so much more from those who seek to lead us.


Sorry if I took you out of context Karrie.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

There are other issues besides global warming that are just as serious. Excess CO2 in the atmosphere has resulted in greater uptake of the gas in the oceans and an increase in acidicy there. Seeing as we depend on the seas for most of our oxygen and protein on this planet, having the food chain collapse there would be catastrophic.

Say what you want about Gore, at least he's willing to acknowledge the problem and support effective measures to deal with it. Unlike people like Bush and Cheney who until recently were unwilling to even admit there was a problem and still refuse to support mandatory measures that will affect an industry they have benefited so much from. They've even gone to war to secure one of the largest oil reserves in the world, I hardly think they're willing to look at alternatives to the current destructive energy model. Instead they'll attack anyone who threatens their source of wealth like Gore does.

Gore=positive change
Bush/Cheney=four pack a day habit for the planet

 

[Locutus]

It's really bittersweet. I don't even know that more opinions will help. Theres enough of them out there for people to hear. Theres more than enough information for someone to read and get both sides and decide for themselves, but I think the problem is the deluge of information that exists. The varied opinions are confusing really. On a simple issue like at what level to stabilize at, if you search out information, you will get things like 90% of 1990, or 20% below 2005 levels, and so many other varied statistics. How does the public square that, when essentially, they are all saying the same thing, but with different stats? The irony is that almost all of those stabilization regimes are in the same ballpark for ghg concentrations, but it doesn't look that way to the public.

Is Gore now to be the ultimate stamp of approval? It seems he just might be.

Fella like Cousteau, gals like Goodall, and so many others...I think they are creatures of the past. Media demands such a price.

The poster boys like this clown Gore are a sad reflection of the human species. He's a high carbon-deficit flabby multi-millionaire installed as the front man.

We believe what we're told, but only when it's told by someone we're told we're to believe.

Real scientists and naturalists can remain joke fodder and PBS personalities I'm afraid. Even the highest quality presenters like David Attenborough.

But again, the OP concerns this guy and the (perhaps) tarnished 'Peace Prize'. He's done nothing in Nobel's preamble to deserve such an illusory victory. He should graciously refuse to accept it on those grounds in my opinion.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

So you're solidly behind the retarded president who took the place of the one who actually has a brain and can use it.

Kind of confirms the impression you give around here.

 

[Locutus]

So you're solidly behind the retarded president who took the place of the one who actually has a brain and can use it.

Kind of confirms the impression you give around here.

Bush is an idiot. You obviously haven't bothered to read my posts about him. Look them up son. :lol:

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

It obviously doesn't stop you from the moronic Gore bashing that has its origins in the Bush camp.

 

[Locutus]

It obviously doesn't stop you from the moronic Gore bashing that has its origins in the Bush camp.

Hope we haven't hurt your feelings.

Anyway, of course it doesn't because all this Goretastic news is propogated by a hypocritical mouthpiece. Some of the science is valid but that doesn't change the fact he's using 'his' infomercial as political propoganda. :lol:

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

We? you got crabs?:lol:

The real hypocrisy is from the right of the spectrum who are telling us everything will be fine if we do nothing meanwhile pulling record profits from the industry that is doing the damage.

 

[Locutus]

We? you got crabs?:lol:

The real hypocrisy is from the right of the spectrum who are telling us everything will be fine if we do nothing meanwhile pulling record profits from the industry that is doing the damage.

Quality retort son. ;-)


Some of the science is valid but that doesn't change the fact he's using 'his' infomercial as political propoganda. :lol:

OP. Albert does not deserve a 'peace prize'. Marketting, razzy, youtube top 10, sure; but not the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[#juan]

What is amazing is the number of people on this topic who have obviously never seen Gore's movie, but are stomping on Gore with both feet.

 

[Locutus]

What is amazing is the number of people on this topic who have obviously never seen Gore's movie, but are stomping on Gore with both feet.

If that's directed toward me juan, I've seen it.

It's the standard USA model of making people afraid. We're all gonna die!

As I've said many times before, some of the science is valid (in the expert opinion of other climatolgists and published professionals) and requires action.

The point here, in your original threading, is that pal Al gets a prize out this. It's offensive to most all who have been recipients before. Peace? I think not.

 

[Walter]

no one even had the spunk to slap their name on it. Rather dumping it under the authorless jurisdiction of the paper. I think you should have to try harder than that to debunk what is claimed to be false.

The name is in the byline at the beginning of the article.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

What is amazing is the number of people on this topic who have obviously never seen Gore's movie, but are stomping on Gore with both feet.

Do you not see the disservice Al Gore is doing to the environmental movement? He does not practice what he preaches. By giving him the prize, they are saying 'its ok to live in a mansion with a carbon footprint of 3 small countries as long as you make movies and try to convince other people to help the environment'. This was the same problem with LiveEarth. Nobody will listen to rock stars flying to locales in private environmentaly unfriendly jets who play a few songs and tell them they should be saving the environment. The preacher must be following what he is preaching.

I think if Dr. David Suzuki had gotten the prize this thread would not be here.

 

[#juan]

If that's directed toward me juan, I've seen it.

It's the standard USA model of making people afraid. We're all gonna die!

As I've said many times before, some of the science is valid (in the expert opinion of other climatolgists and published professionals) and requires action.

The point here, in your original threading, is that pal Al gets a prize out this. It's offensive to most all who have been recipients before. Peace? I think not.

No, it was not directed at you.
I have the dvd of Gore's movie and while I agree that he should have toned down the water level predictions, he was right or near right on most everything else. From everything I've read on this topic, another degree or two of warming would be catastrophic.....not in terms of sea levels rising 40 feet but weather extremes, drought and famine. The world is a tense place now.....Wait till we add another 40 or 50 million people to the lists of the starving.
Right now the worst emitters of green house gases are probably North Americans but China and Russia will be competing for that honour in a decade.
My biggest complaint about this whole global warming debate is that nobody talks about the other greenhouse gases, methane, nitrious oxide, etc. which are worse in a lot of ways than C02.

If Gore succeeds in getting the message out there, he will have done a lot for world peace.

 

[#juan]

By giving him the prize, they are saying 'its ok to live in a mansion with a carbon footprint of 3 small countries as long as you make movies and try to convince other people to help the environment'.

Three small countries? Think about what you are saying. I know it was an intentional exaggeration but there are thousands of mansions in the U.S. which are bigger than Gore's family home. A family home that was built by his father. Do you know how many people live in that home?

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Three small countries? Think about what you are saying. I know it was an intentional exaggeration but there are thousands of mansions in the U.S. which are bigger than Gore's family home. A family home that was built by his father.

He is asking us all to make sacrifices for the environment yet he makes hardly any. He could at least install solar panels on his home. Personally, I discount anybody asking me to do something that they themselves are unwilling to do. I suspect I am not the only one.

And yes, it was an intentionall exaguration. But using the logic you used in your defence ... since there are hundreds of thousands of SUVs on the road it should be perfectly acceptable for me to drive an SUV?

Do you know how many people live in that home?

I assume him and his family. The exact number is not known to me. Can you enlighten?

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

Some of the science is valid but that doesn't change the fact he's using 'his' infomercial as political propoganda. :lol:

OP. Albert does not deserve a 'peace prize'. Marketting, razzy, youtube top 10, sure; but not the Nobel Peace Prize.

Gores central message is valid, the science is improving every year and the more we look the more reason there is to be concerned. If anything the processes of climate change are progressing faster than was thought even three years ago. Arctic sea ice is disappearing at a much higher rate than models have predicted and so is the Greenland icecap. Scientists have discovered widespread melting of the permafrost in our Arctic this summer.

Relying on voluntary limits like Bush and Harper are talking about is bullshiite, only mandatory limits like those proposed by Gore and others will be effective. The argument that the economic costs will be too high are also nonsense, extreme weather effects like droughts, flooding, tornados, hurricanes, etc... are going to have huge economic costs. That's just in the short term, rising sea-levels will innundate large coastal areas and islands all over the planet.

Claiming that Gores views are invalid because he lives in a house and travels by air as do most people in our society is utter nonsense. Especially when those who oppose him represent even greater wealth and priviledge which they are seeking to protect no matter the consequences to us all.

This is all about protecting the oil industry which Bush and Harper are frontmen for, they can't attack Gore on the science anymore and he's not in bed with Big Oil so the best they can do is claim he lives in a big house, it's ridiculous.