The first time I had ever read anything about global warming was in the 1980's. The book was "Earth in the Balance," by Al Gore. I do remember him being ridiculed at that time as a kook. I think its good that he has gotten recognition for his persistence in elevating the global warming debate. His message about global warming has been consistent.

 

Gore shared the prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations network of scientists. The scientific panel has explained the dry details of global warming in thousands of pages of footnoted reports every six years or so since 1990.

More than 20 top climate scientists told The Associated Press last year that the film was generally accurate in its presentation of the science, although some were bothered by what they thought were a couple of exaggerations. Gore said he planned to donate his share of the $1.5 million prize to the nonprofit alliance he chairs.

 

For the rest of the article go to

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071013/ap_on_sc/nobel_peace;_ylt=AphmePhgV5D_Zef2fPqchHZxieAA

The first time I had ever read anything about global warming was in the 1980's. The book was "Earth in the Balance," by Al Gore. I do remember him being ridiculed at that time as a kook. I think its good that he has gotten recognition for his persistence in elevating the global warming debate. His message about global warming has been consistent.

 

Gore shared the prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations network of scientists. The scientific panel has explained the dry details of global warming in thousands of pages of footnoted reports every six years or so since 1990.

More than 20 top climate scientists told The Associated Press last year that the film was generally accurate in its presentation of the science, although some were bothered by what they thought were a couple of exaggerations. Gore said he planned to donate his share of the $1.5 million prize to the nonprofit alliance he chairs.

 

For the rest of the article go to

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071013/ap_on_sc/nobel_peace;_ylt=AphmePhgV5D_Zef2fPqchHZxieAA

And they are no more deserving than he is, what a joke. :lol:

 

Generally accurate? A couple of exaggerations? :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Here's more than a couple, and they're not exaggerations, that the British Government and Court found.

 

The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.

The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.

The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming.

The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.

The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.

The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.

The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.

The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.

The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

And they are no more deserving than he is, what a joke. :lol:

 

Generally accurate? A couple of exaggerations? :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Here's more than a couple, and they're not exaggerations, that the British Government and Court found.

The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.

The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.

The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming.

The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.

The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.

The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.

The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.

The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.

The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

Since when did the British government become the authority on global warning? You can believe whatever...I'll take my authority from the 20 top climate scientists.

I love how Al Gore is a "joke" for trying to make the world a better place... how dare he.

Since when did the British government become the authority on global warning? You can believe whatever...I'll take my authority from the 20 top climate scientists.

"More than 20 top climatologists..." "the top 20 climatologists..." The wording difference is subtle but the difference is significant. Many top climatologists disagree with Al Gore. Even some of the climatologists who generally agree with Gore have criticized him for exaggerating the dangers of global warming.

I love how Al Gore is a "joke" for trying to make the world a better place... how dare he.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

If you believe he is in this for anything but himself, you simply are too easily duped IMO.

Since when did the British government become the authority on global warning? You can believe whatever...I'll take my authority from the 20 top climate scientists.

Umm, top twenty my aunt fanny. I don't just believe whatever, I've read the studies from actual climatologists and side with them.

 

Can you dispute what the Brits have claimed?

"More than 20 top climatologists..." "the top 20 climatologists..." The wording difference is subtle but the difference is significant. Many top climatologists disagree with Al Gore. Even some of the climatologists who generally agree with Gore have criticized him for exaggerating the dangers of global warming.

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

If you believe he is in this for anything but himself, you simply are too easily duped IMO.

I think you are just way too politically jaded. It's not like he was broke and looking for a way to make some quick money. He has been working with this issue since before he was even in office and didn't start the movie project until after he got out. I don't see his name on any ballots right now, what exactly do you think he's trying to gain by doing this? There are issues on this planet that are above politics and this is one of them.

I think you are just way too politically jaded. It's not like he was broke and looking for a way to make some quick money. He has been working with this issue since before he was even in office and didn't start the movie project until after he got out. I don't see his name on any ballots right now, what exactly do you think he's trying to gain by doing this? There are issues on this planet that are above politics and this is one of them.

Not even close to politically jaded, I've been know to vote for Dems in the past, so long as they're the best choice. They haven't been the best choice for president, so they didn't get my vote, but I have voted for them on other levels.

No, this issue is nothing of importance since their is no PROOF that it actually happening. Remember, 25 years ago we were heading for another Ice Age.

What's in it for Gore? More money, for one. Political gain for another. Just because he isn't on any ballot now doesn't mean he won't be. If you don't see him run for President next election, it'll only be because he knows he can't carry the Dems yet, but expect him to run for the next one.

You have to give me some real solid truth and proof that global warming is an actual occurrence or if it is simply solar and or weather cycles.

You really would have to show me some real truth or proof that any of it is man made.

I think you are just way too politically jaded. It's not like he was broke and looking for a way to make some quick money. He has been working with this issue since before he was even in office and didn't start the movie project until after he got out. I don't see his name on any ballots right now, what exactly do you think he's trying to gain by doing this? There are issues on this planet that are above politics and this is one of them.

You are correct Al Gore is far from broke. The family fortune was made in the fossil fuel industry.

 

Gore already collects large fees for speaking engagements and he may fetch bigger fees with the Nobel Prize under his belt. Al Gore is a very wealthy man who makes as much as $100,000 for his 75-minute sky is falling presentation.

 

Easy money - that is what Gore has to gain by exaggerating the dangers of global warming and man's role in it.

You are correct Al Gore is far from broke. The family fortune was made in the fossil fuel industry.

 

Gore already collects large fees for speaking engagements and he may fetch bigger fees with the Nobel Prize under his belt. Al Gore is a very wealthy man who makes as much as $100,000 for his 75-minute sky is falling presentation.

 

Easy money - that is what Gore has to gain by exaggerating the dangers of global warming and man's role in it.

 

That is what you choose to think on the situation, I think differently.

Not even close to politically jaded, I've been know to vote for Dems in the past, so long as they're the best choice. They haven't been the best choice for president, so they didn't get my vote, but I have voted for them on other levels.

No, this issue is nothing of importance since their is no PROOF that it actually happening. Remember, 25 years ago we were heading for another Ice Age.

What's in it for Gore? More money, for one. Political gain for another. Just because he isn't on any ballot now doesn't mean he won't be. If you don't see him run for President next election, it'll only be because he knows he can't carry the Dems yet, but expect him to run for the next one.

You have to give me some real solid truth and proof that global warming is an actual occurrence or if it is simply solar and or weather cycles.

You really would have to show me some real truth or proof that any of it is man made.

Is the proof not already out there? Just because Gore exagerates things does not invalidate the other facts that are not disputed.

That is what you choose to think on the situation, I think differently.

You asked what Gore might have to gain by exaggerating the global warning issue, and I provided an answer. I think Gore's motives are obvious. If Gore believed all of the misinformation that he pushes, I think that he would be practicing what he preaches. Follow the money!

Is the proof not already out there? Just because Gore exagerates things does not invalidate the other facts that are not disputed.

 

Since Gore exagerated some of the facts, leads me to believe all of his facts could be tainted. I have a hard time trusting someone once they have lied or mislead me.