Hooray.

But though I call myself a tree-hugger, I'm not sure that struggling against global warming is really peace-making, unless you stretch the definitions very wide. Still, Al did deserve some praise for his good work.



And he certainly deserves the NPP more than, say, that criminal Henry Kissinger.

I'm starting to think that the Nobel Prize institutions need to spin off a new prize for more general humanitarian accomplishments. We haven't yet entirely escaped the dangers of international conflict, so there's still a relevant role for the Nobel Peace Prize in that regard.

I have been too, I've been spraying these blasted aerosol spray cans as much as I can but I don't think it's working... I think Polar Bears can actually swim, darn them and their ability to avoid extinction!
On a more serious note, it's all to setup a global carbon tax to basically tax people on breathing.
Carbon is not bad, plants need it, therefore it's green.
I want to get a job as a climatologist, I mean heck, how difficult can it be?
Generate a few hockey stick charts, get some scenes of icecaps melting, and guilt people into believing it's all because they produce Carbon Dioxide (breath).

Stop Breathing!

In the 80's it was global cooling, now it's global warming, now it's climate change because they can't back up anything other than the normal cycle, not these dramatic hype theories.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io-Tb7vTamY

Not sure that Gore deserved a Nobel for his efforts regarding global warning, but do agree that it was something that AT LEAST deserved some global awareness. The fact that we pour pollutants into our atmosphere without care is worrisome on more than just this perspective. There are health issues that should concern us as well as the melting polar ice cap.

Heard a statement on some television documentary-like report that we give off in the neighbourhood of 5 million tons of carbon dioxide a day. Guess it if weren't for how expansive our atmosphere really is, I'd be choking by now (literally!).

There are other greenhouse gases which would combine with the excessive amount of CO₂, like methane, to result in much greater changes in global climate. Global warming isn't a fiction. It just has yet to be determined how fast it is occuring and if this is failing to be some kind of cyclic occurrence every couple of hundred years.

Climate change exists and has always existed (no, not the hockey stick to infinity chart kind). People don't debate the fact that the climate does change.

"Global warming" though is political scaremongering (output via mass media) with a hidden global agenda.

What happened to "Global cooling" and "the next Ice Age"?

Al Gore sued by over 30.000 Scientists for fraud
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfHW7KR33IQ

Scientists use it to get grants, and mass media uses it because they're bought and paid for, which is why a global carbon tax will eventually be implemented.

Research the cause-effect relationship of CO2 driving temperature.
Temperatures go up, then CO2 goes up, not the other way around.

I could swear we have a topic on that already.

We do indeed.

I think the topic was more oriented towards the "recognition" that Al Gore received for his "humanitarian" efforts when receiving the Nobel.

Lorpius pointed out that it used to be for serving a role in the peaceful process akin to what Jimmy Carter did at Camp David with Egypt and Israel. But then he had Kissinger already lay a foundation, so that isn't necessarily fair either. Not too many aspire to become Ghandis with all the military hardware that is out there.

Also, as a huge proponent of the Internet... we overlook the fact that it has to be powered by electricity which is often gained from plants converting carbon-based fuels into that form of energy. Isn't that ironic?? :)