The Nobel prize has been getting cheaper and cheaper for decades. It's now worth the same as a Cracker Jack box toy.

It's just another "Prize/Award" for the narcissistic liberals to give each other. If it wasn't for them giving themselves awards, they wouldn't have any.

I just wish we would save the rainforests first, I mean we only have what 2-3 years till they're gone?

QUOTE: "First, I don't think man as we know man had yet evolved several thousand years ago. Maybe there was some sort of hominid, but it wasn't "man," man.

I'm not sure, but I believe the last great climate change was the Ice Age. Didn't that kill off the dinosaurs? Neither man nor his predecessors coexist with the dinosaurs."
___________________________

Well... duh.... "had they been alive" meant... just that!



"Who the foook is melting all my ICE!"

Are all you 'eco-nuts' entirely devoid of humor? (Must I always use a smilie face?)

there can be no humor in religon... if you don't take it serious, you go to hell. ever notice what happens when you don't agree with an extreme left wing person?

Let's see, last week a British court ruled that "An Inconvenient Truth" contains at least nine material falsehoods and can be shown to students only if it is identified as containing "partisan political views" that promote only one side of the global warming argument.

This week, he gets a Nobel Prize for the very same partisan political view. I wonder if the people handing out the ribbons are on the same side of the aisle as Gore? :rolleyes:

First, you don't have to have faith to develop an appreciation for the extent to which our environment is being adversely effected by things that it is entirely within our grasp to change.

Second, you do not need faith to make a difference. Measureable improvements can be achieved through simple choices: in the way you insulate your home, the mileage you get in your car, the politicians you support etc. etc.

This is not faith. It is science. Science supported by the best minds in the business, and now recognized by the Nobel Committee.

It was nice to watch some German television tonight and see the extent to which Al is being feted in Europe. People are delighted by this recognition of an important contribution - regardless of political affiliation - something some of you will clearly never get.

I like that we have preacher Gore willing to sell global warming sins . . "carbon credits" for this new religion. It's fun to watch the anti-religion drink the kool-aid of the new ecco-religion, all while claiming "science."

"it not faith. It is science. . . la la dee da da... hallie-looooYaaa!"

Carbon Credits are simply the 'penance' of the global warming religion. You've sinned my son by driving your old polluting 911, but buy some carbon credits and you're forgiven! :D

And then there's the Carbon Credits themselves. Here's how they work:

>>>>Climate Care (one of the largest sellers of Carbon Credits) uses the money to help persuade families in India to give up labor-saving diesel pumps and buy human-powered treadles instead. It claims that by using the treadle, a family will save money on diesel and hire charges, earn more from increased crops and cut the carbon emissions that would have been produced by the pump.

Pumping furiously on a foot treadle in the afternoon heat, six-year-old Sarju Ram is irrigating her impoverished family’s field, improving the crop and – without knowing it – helping environmentally sensitive holiday-makers assuage their guilt over long-haul flights to dream destinations.

But Sarju and her four brothers and sisters working flat out in a clump of trees that provide scant shelter from the sun illustrate a growing argument over claims that British environmentalists’ efforts to curb greenhouse emissions are inadvertently fueling an increase in child labor.<<<<

What a scam .....

if it is not faith and is science, please offer your imperical proof of the claims being made and, this is key, the evidence should support the degree and extent of the forecast of things to come as documented in Gore's movie.

just because some don't share your view, doesn't mean the 'don't get it'. it means they don't agree with it. I conceded in my post that there was warming. I simply questioned whether it was all man made and my main issue as a person of faith, is that in my view it is the ultimate foolishness of man to think that he can totally control his environment, etc.

so I again re-state my view that there is a degree of consistency between faith in a religious sense and faith in global warming. the later being very influenced by peoples desire to see themselves as the most evolved life form and therefore in control.

we didn't create this world, and we can't destroy it.

we can damage it, and I think we all should be as responsible as we can for the environment in balance with the needs humans have and which are provided by so called destructive means e.g. fosil fuel, etc.

the logic and the science are not totally sound here.

Dottore:

Al Gore is not my favorite person ( I think he's a hypocrite ) and I typically vote conservative, but I do recognize that he has brought attention to global warming or climate change or whatever it's called. Despite how the attention was generated, he did create the awareness! I think that's a net good thing.

What I and many others would argue is not that climate change is occurring, but what is causing the change. Man, the sun, other factors? I think you might agree that the scientific community is not in full agreement on this issue and, at least, the causes are arguable.

Having said all of that, the movement towards efficient, renewable non-polluting energy sources is a welcome development and I have no problem patting Al on the back for this. I have a personal goal of generating, on-site, all of the household energy my family and I use - I would like to do this in the next few years.

The tipping point for this green movement will come when people can recoup the costs of converting to green energy quickly and start saving money. I've already cut my electrical utility bills in half by switching to the newer version of the CFL bulbs - 50% savings per month, seriously.

Back to Gore, I think there can still be reasonable debate about how Gore's actions, which did create heightened environmental awareness, translate into a peace prize.

FWIW.

Best,

Kurt

I think that there should be a major revamping of the Nobel Peace Prize selection process. Things have really gone downhill over the years (freekn' Sweeeds!). Remember the first prize winner? Man o' man, that was DY NO MITE!

The contributors to this great bbs would be a great group to make the selection considering the broad base of intellect represented, ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous. Who would be candidates for the prize? Anyone? Anyone?

Don't mind me; I'm a bit pissed - I think I just paid six hundred bucks too much for innernet tikets to the Nobel Pullitzer Prize Fight.

Ya know, the next really big volcano to blow, and it 110% WILL happen, could put us back into an ice age in a matter of months. At the very least, it can cool the Earth a few degrees and last for hundreds of years. Imagine the western industrialized nations bankrupting themselves to clear their consciences for contributing to climate change and then mother nature undoing all of it with a snap of her fingers.

I wish you would have posted the complete judgement of the British court. They found - and God know how they do this - nine "factual errors" - in a film that was absolutely brimming with facts and statistics. Nine factual errors (not "material falsehoods") in this context is pretty good. They also went on to applaud the film, and Al Gore and recommend it for the British school curricula! So at least give credit where credit is due.

I'm curious, how many scientists here on this thread? How many climatologists? I'm just trying to get a sense about how much hot air is being expelled here so I know whether this man-made global warming stuff is real or not. Thanks. :)

Good grief! Offer proof? Support the stuff stated in Gore's movie? Give me a break! There have been enough threads on this already. -

No one - not even Gore - says ALL climate change is down to man-made issues. But a good chunk very clearly is - and that is the chunk he is addressing. The one we can do something about. And if he has at least opened your eyes THIS far - then he has succeeded.

Sure. Reasonable men can differ about many things and this is probably one of them.

But if you accept the propositions: (a) that an unnecessary reliance on scarce and non-renewable sources of energy is likely to promote global conflict; and, conversely, (b) that a greater focus on renewable energy and sustainable development is likely help to minimize global conflict - then you are well on your way to understanding why big Al deserves the peace prize.

If you don't accept these propositions - well then you are merely irrational.

I believe this is a debatable point, not an "is", FWIW. You might more effectively argue this point by stating that "a good chunk of climate change may be attributable to man."

I believe it is a separate issue regarding what can be done by man to change or alter climate change.

Bottom line, again IMHO, is that clean, renewable energy is a noble goal of man and a worthwhile pursuit.

I am not a professional scientist or climatologist, but I have read enough dissenting positions from credible scientists to comprehend that these issues are not settled within the scientific community.

Best,

Kurt

Well, that is unreasonable. :D

Best,

Kurt

Interesting you bring this up. Back in the seventies, my then wife and I were Danforth Associates. At one of the gatherings we attended, in Yosemite, If I recall correctly, a scientist gave a lecture warning about the destruction of the rain forrests. At that time this was something falling on most ears for the first time (with the exception of a very few scientists).

It had not hit the airwaves or newspapers yet and the audience sat stunned by what the lecturer was saying. He summed up, bemoaning the fact that, even at that early stage of discovery, it was too late to stop the destruction and the earth stood to suffer a grand catastrophe of biblical proportions, all caused by man and his combination of greed, arrogance and ignorance.

Several years later it became popular news and was met with the same denial and disdain that global warming has, and in certain ignorant circles, still is.

There is NO renewable energy source. It is a farce. Wind, solar, just a joke. Nuclear, a possibility but will never happen because of zealots, man will starve first.

Man is DOOMED unless he learns to utilize fossil energy efficiently. There is NO alternative energy source.