Gore nominated for Nobel Peace Prize archived
So Gore wins the election in 2000 but doesn't get the presidency and gets nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize while Bush loses the election becomes president and is well on his way to international court to be tried for crimes against humanity.
Ironic.
Ironic.
I admire his work for the environment, but relating it to peace is a stretch.
The article I read said something about how the choice of so many environmentally-focused Peace Prize nominees indicates how closely the committee ties environmental degradation to violence. I think the link is pretty clear. Environmental degradation is generally caused by the demand for natural resources. So are most wars.
Feb 1, 2007 at 9:40am Edited
AP Newsbreak: Man-Made Global Warming Real, Worsening, Says Panel of Top Scientists
By SETH BORENSTEIN
AP Science Writer
(AP) 04:47:10 PM (ET), Thursday, February 1, 2007 (PARIS)
A long-awaited report says global warming is "very likely" man-made, the most powerful language ever used on the issue by the world's leading climate scientists, delegates who have seen the report said Thursday.
And the document, the most authoritative science on the issue, says the disturbing signs are already visible in rising seas, killer heat waves, worsening droughts and stronger hurricanes.
There was another signal, too: The City of Light dimmed the lights.
It was an expression of concern over the state of the planet as the world awaited the report's release on Friday. Slowly, starting first with the iconic Eiffel Tower and then spreading to the hotel where many scientists were staying, Paris quieted and dimmed ever so slightly, even as those still fine-tuning the document burned the midnight oil.
The report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change _ a group of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments _ unanimously portrays the science of global warming as an existing and worsening threat, officials told The Associated Press.
"There's no question that the powerful language is intimately linked to the more powerful science," said one of the study's many co-authors, Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria, who spoke by phone from Canada. He said the report was based on science that is rock-solid, peer-reviewed, conservative and consensus: "It's very conservative. Scientists by their nature are skeptics."
The scientists wrote the report, based on years of peer-reviewed research; government officials edited it with an eye toward the required unanimous approval by world governments.
In the end, there was little debate on the strength of the wording about human activity most likely to blame.
"That is a big move. I hope it is a powerful statement," said Jan Pretel, head of the department of climate change at the Czech Hydrometeorological Institute.
The panel quickly agreed Thursday on two of the most contentious issues: attributing global warming to man-made burning of fossil fuels and connecting it to a recent increase in stronger hurricanes. Negotiations over a final third difficult issue _ how much sea level rise is predicted by 2100 _ went into the night Thursday with a deadline approaching for the report.
While critics call the panel overly alarmist, it is by nature relatively cautious because it relies on hundreds of scientists, including skeptics.
"I hope that policymakers will be quite convinced by this message," said Riibeta Abeta, a delegate whose island nation Kiribati is threatened by rising seas. "The purpose is to get them moving."
It took delegates just 90 minutes to agree on the signature statement which describes how sure scientists are about global warming being caused by man. The answer _ "very likely" _ translates to a more than 90 percent certainty.
What that means in layman's language is "we have this nailed," said top U.S. climate scientist Jerry Mahlman, who originated the percentage system.
"They're hearing through the science that this is appropriate," Mahlman, a reviewer of panel's work but not an author or editor, said. "I'm pretty happy with the 'very likely' designation."
That phrase is an escalation from the panel's last report in 2001, which said warming was "likely" caused by human activity. There had been speculation that the participants might try to up the ante too "virtually certain" man causes global warming, which translates to 99 percent chance.
The Chinese delegation was resistant to strong wording on global warming, said Barbados delegate Leonard Fields and others. China has increasingly turned to fossil fuels for its huge and growing energy needs and it asked that an ambiguous footnote be added to the "very likely" statement.
The footnote reads, "Consideration of remaining uncertainty is based on current methodology," according to an official who was at the negotiations but was sworn to secrecy.
Meanwhile, the U.S. government delegation was not one of the more vocal groups in the debate over whether warming is man-made, said other countries' officials. And several attendees credited the head of the panel session, Susan Solomon, a top U.S. government climate scientist, with pushing through the agreement so quickly.
"The Bush administration acknowledges that global warming is man-made and a problem that must be dealt with, Bush science adviser John Marburger has said. However, Bush continues to reject mandatory limits on so-called "greenhouse" gases, even as he acknowledges the existence of climate change."
But this is more than just a U.S. issue.
"What you're trying to do is get the whole planet under the proverbial tent in how to deal with this, not just the rich countries," Mahlman said Thursday. "I think we're in a different kind of game now."
The panel, created by the United Nations in 1988, releases its assessments every five or six years _ although scientists have been observing aspects of climate change since as far back as the 1960s. The reports are released in phases, with this one being the first of four this year.
The next report is due in April and will discuss the effects of global warming.
But there are some elements of that in the current document.
The report will say that global warming has made stronger hurricanes, including those on the Atlantic Ocean, such as Hurricane Katrina, according to Fields, the Barbados delegate, and others.
They said the panel agreed that an increase in hurricane and tropical cyclone strength since 1970 "more likely than not" can be attributed to man-made global warming. The scientists said global warming's connection varies with storms in different parts of the world, but that the storms that strike the Americas are global warming-influenced.
That's a contrast from the 2001 which said there was not enough evidence to make such a conclusion. And it conflicts with a November 2006 statement by the World Meteorological Organization, which helped found the IPCC. The meteorological group said it could not link past stronger storms to global warming.
By SETH BORENSTEIN
AP Science Writer
(AP) 04:47:10 PM (ET), Thursday, February 1, 2007 (PARIS)
A long-awaited report says global warming is "very likely" man-made, the most powerful language ever used on the issue by the world's leading climate scientists, delegates who have seen the report said Thursday.
And the document, the most authoritative science on the issue, says the disturbing signs are already visible in rising seas, killer heat waves, worsening droughts and stronger hurricanes.
There was another signal, too: The City of Light dimmed the lights.
It was an expression of concern over the state of the planet as the world awaited the report's release on Friday. Slowly, starting first with the iconic Eiffel Tower and then spreading to the hotel where many scientists were staying, Paris quieted and dimmed ever so slightly, even as those still fine-tuning the document burned the midnight oil.
The report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change _ a group of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments _ unanimously portrays the science of global warming as an existing and worsening threat, officials told The Associated Press.
"There's no question that the powerful language is intimately linked to the more powerful science," said one of the study's many co-authors, Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria, who spoke by phone from Canada. He said the report was based on science that is rock-solid, peer-reviewed, conservative and consensus: "It's very conservative. Scientists by their nature are skeptics."
The scientists wrote the report, based on years of peer-reviewed research; government officials edited it with an eye toward the required unanimous approval by world governments.
In the end, there was little debate on the strength of the wording about human activity most likely to blame.
"That is a big move. I hope it is a powerful statement," said Jan Pretel, head of the department of climate change at the Czech Hydrometeorological Institute.
The panel quickly agreed Thursday on two of the most contentious issues: attributing global warming to man-made burning of fossil fuels and connecting it to a recent increase in stronger hurricanes. Negotiations over a final third difficult issue _ how much sea level rise is predicted by 2100 _ went into the night Thursday with a deadline approaching for the report.
While critics call the panel overly alarmist, it is by nature relatively cautious because it relies on hundreds of scientists, including skeptics.
"I hope that policymakers will be quite convinced by this message," said Riibeta Abeta, a delegate whose island nation Kiribati is threatened by rising seas. "The purpose is to get them moving."
It took delegates just 90 minutes to agree on the signature statement which describes how sure scientists are about global warming being caused by man. The answer _ "very likely" _ translates to a more than 90 percent certainty.
What that means in layman's language is "we have this nailed," said top U.S. climate scientist Jerry Mahlman, who originated the percentage system.
"They're hearing through the science that this is appropriate," Mahlman, a reviewer of panel's work but not an author or editor, said. "I'm pretty happy with the 'very likely' designation."
That phrase is an escalation from the panel's last report in 2001, which said warming was "likely" caused by human activity. There had been speculation that the participants might try to up the ante too "virtually certain" man causes global warming, which translates to 99 percent chance.
The Chinese delegation was resistant to strong wording on global warming, said Barbados delegate Leonard Fields and others. China has increasingly turned to fossil fuels for its huge and growing energy needs and it asked that an ambiguous footnote be added to the "very likely" statement.
The footnote reads, "Consideration of remaining uncertainty is based on current methodology," according to an official who was at the negotiations but was sworn to secrecy.
Meanwhile, the U.S. government delegation was not one of the more vocal groups in the debate over whether warming is man-made, said other countries' officials. And several attendees credited the head of the panel session, Susan Solomon, a top U.S. government climate scientist, with pushing through the agreement so quickly.
"The Bush administration acknowledges that global warming is man-made and a problem that must be dealt with, Bush science adviser John Marburger has said. However, Bush continues to reject mandatory limits on so-called "greenhouse" gases, even as he acknowledges the existence of climate change."
But this is more than just a U.S. issue.
"What you're trying to do is get the whole planet under the proverbial tent in how to deal with this, not just the rich countries," Mahlman said Thursday. "I think we're in a different kind of game now."
The panel, created by the United Nations in 1988, releases its assessments every five or six years _ although scientists have been observing aspects of climate change since as far back as the 1960s. The reports are released in phases, with this one being the first of four this year.
The next report is due in April and will discuss the effects of global warming.
But there are some elements of that in the current document.
The report will say that global warming has made stronger hurricanes, including those on the Atlantic Ocean, such as Hurricane Katrina, according to Fields, the Barbados delegate, and others.
They said the panel agreed that an increase in hurricane and tropical cyclone strength since 1970 "more likely than not" can be attributed to man-made global warming. The scientists said global warming's connection varies with storms in different parts of the world, but that the storms that strike the Americas are global warming-influenced.
That's a contrast from the 2001 which said there was not enough evidence to make such a conclusion. And it conflicts with a November 2006 statement by the World Meteorological Organization, which helped found the IPCC. The meteorological group said it could not link past stronger storms to global warming.
Yea, but shouldn't we hear from the bought and paid for Exxon scientists before we listen to the international scientific community? After all we MUST be fair and balanced.
/sarcasm
/sarcasm
Peace is impossible when people suffer.
Al Gore deserves consideration for his participation in the film and going around the country demonstrating that global warming is here, knocking loudly at our collective doors, and will break down the door if we don't change our habits right away.
Al Gore deserves consideration for his participation in the film and going around the country demonstrating that global warming is here, knocking loudly at our collective doors, and will break down the door if we don't change our habits right away.
Oscar nomination and now a Nobel Peace prize. No wonder Gore has put off his declaring for the Presidential race.
There's an odd sense of linkage here.
The Defense Department and each of the major military services independently have run scenario after scenario of the kind of regional and international conflicts that they foresee occurring as, when, and if global warming continues at its current pace and disrupts crop plantings, crop harvests, access to water, food, and other resources in various parts of the world.
They are not pretty scenarios, and the military understands their risks.
Perhaps the Nobel Peace Prize committee, meeting in Oslo, in a country with a superb reputation for respecting the environment, understands the consequences for peace of sensible and far-sighted environmental values.
The Defense Department and each of the major military services independently have run scenario after scenario of the kind of regional and international conflicts that they foresee occurring as, when, and if global warming continues at its current pace and disrupts crop plantings, crop harvests, access to water, food, and other resources in various parts of the world.
They are not pretty scenarios, and the military understands their risks.
Perhaps the Nobel Peace Prize committee, meeting in Oslo, in a country with a superb reputation for respecting the environment, understands the consequences for peace of sensible and far-sighted environmental values.
Climate Scientists Say Global Warming Is 'Very Likely' Caused by Man and Will Be Unstoppable
By SETH BORENSTEIN
(AP) 03:45:58 AM (ET), Friday, February 2, 2007 (PARIS)
The world's leading climate scientists said global warming has begun, is "very likely" caused by man, and will be unstoppable for centuries, according to a report obtained Friday by The Associated Press.
The scientists _ using their strongest language yet on the issue _ said now that the world has begun to warm, hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries," no matter how much humans control their pollution. The report also linked the warming to the recent increase in stronger hurricanes.
"The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone," said the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change _ a group of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments.
The phrase "very likely" translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.
What that means in simple language is "we have this nailed," said top U.S. climate scientist Jerry Mahlman, who originated the percentage system.
Sharon Hays, associate director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy at the White House, welcomed the strong language of the report.
"It's a significant report. It will be valuable to policy makers," she told The Associated Press in an interview in Paris, where hundreds of scientists and government officials were meeting to discuss global warming.
Hays stopped short of saying whether or how the report could bring about change in President Bush's policy about greenhouse gas emissions.
By SETH BORENSTEIN
(AP) 03:45:58 AM (ET), Friday, February 2, 2007 (PARIS)
The world's leading climate scientists said global warming has begun, is "very likely" caused by man, and will be unstoppable for centuries, according to a report obtained Friday by The Associated Press.
The scientists _ using their strongest language yet on the issue _ said now that the world has begun to warm, hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries," no matter how much humans control their pollution. The report also linked the warming to the recent increase in stronger hurricanes.
"The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone," said the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change _ a group of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments.
The phrase "very likely" translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.
What that means in simple language is "we have this nailed," said top U.S. climate scientist Jerry Mahlman, who originated the percentage system.
Sharon Hays, associate director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy at the White House, welcomed the strong language of the report.
"It's a significant report. It will be valuable to policy makers," she told The Associated Press in an interview in Paris, where hundreds of scientists and government officials were meeting to discuss global warming.
Hays stopped short of saying whether or how the report could bring about change in President Bush's policy about greenhouse gas emissions.
I've been frustrated for YEARS with the constant mocking from the right wing (especially Mr. Wonderful, Rush Limbaugh) that the liberals are crazy and global warming is BS. "Those tree-hugging environentalists have smoked too much weed, there's no global warming!!!" Thankfully, those perscription pill-popping fat cats can't blame the left anymore. So sorry that they may finally be forced to require their CEO friends to lower their profit margins a bit and conduct their businesses in an environmentally friendly way.
Btw, I also get pretty angry everytime I see a young woman with a ponytail driving around ALONE in the family Durango because, God-forbid they drive a more environmentally friendly family mobile like a station wagon or minivan!! If you don't want a minivan, don't have kids...but spare the rest of us those obnoxious huge SUVs. I hope there will soon be an environmental tax on these monsters, that'll be the only way sales will go down.
Btw, I also get pretty angry everytime I see a young woman with a ponytail driving around ALONE in the family Durango because, God-forbid they drive a more environmentally friendly family mobile like a station wagon or minivan!! If you don't want a minivan, don't have kids...but spare the rest of us those obnoxious huge SUVs. I hope there will soon be an environmental tax on these monsters, that'll be the only way sales will go down.
From Notehead: "Environmental degradation is generally caused by the demand for natural resources. So are most wars. "
Which Wars? The largest Wars with the most damage and deaths over the past 300 years have absolutely nothing to do with Environmental resources such as Water, Food, etc.? I'm sure we could say 1000 years, but I'm having trouble recalling even 1 war this century that was over food and water?
Which Wars? The largest Wars with the most damage and deaths over the past 300 years have absolutely nothing to do with Environmental resources such as Water, Food, etc.? I'm sure we could say 1000 years, but I'm having trouble recalling even 1 war this century that was over food and water?
Natural resources include oil. Nah, I can't think of any wars that are fought over oil. Can you, DH? Think real hard now...
Feb 2, 2007 at 3:17am Edited
I read "natural resources" as including not only food and water, but sources of energy and raw materials. The European empires which clashed to start WW1 were fighting over their colonial holdings (and the resources attainable there) as much as over where to draw their common borders. Pre-WW2, the Japanese Empire was seeking to expand, for the resources available in mainland Asia. African wars are certainly fought over those natural resources (with gold and other valuable metals also in the mix).
Also, a few years ago the winner of the Nobel Peace prize was an African woman who began an environmental restoration project there.
Also, a few years ago the winner of the Nobel Peace prize was an African woman who began an environmental restoration project there.
Thanks, Nohero. And while you can point to ethnic conflicts as a different kind of war, bear in mind that those ethnic tensions generally aren't brought to the breaking point until the respective sides desire each other's resources.
Who needs a Nobel Prize when ExxonMobil's offering big bucks, plus expenses, to any scientist who'll criticize yesterday's report?
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/02/news/companies/exxon_science/
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/02/news/companies/exxon_science/
southerner: I have issues? Unless you're joking, you're pretty out of touch if you've not heard of Rush Limbaugh. My point was that the political right wing and the right wing side of the media (aka Fox Broadcasting) has spent much of the past decade minimizing the risk and mocking the reality of global warming in the interest of corporate profits and political control in Washington. That has succeeded in delaying any real changes to combat global warming. The delay coincided with the SUV craze in this country and our increased use in the very fossil fuels that have increased the rate at which the world's temperature is rising. So, yes, I have issues with people buying and driving huge SUVs for selfish reasons instead of real need. So, perhaps you need to drive yours to a car dealer and trade it in for a Prius. Here's an example of Fox's coverage of global warming, fyi: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDEOIWzeK7o&mode=related&search=
What a bunch of idiots. How much of the media is in Greenland or on the arctic ice cap right now? I've been reading a lot of coverage about the ice sheet sliding into the sea up there.
"They're in many cases parroting what people are telling them to say."
This from a guy from the Cato institute. I can hardly stop laughing long enough to type.
This from a guy from the Cato institute. I can hardly stop laughing long enough to type.
Minnie,
I'm not being dense so take it that way. I seriously don't know who Rush is. Also, what's wrong with pony tails?
By the way, after I saw Al's movie I did just that. I traded in a Bronco and got a Prius. It is awesome!
I'm not being dense so take it that way. I seriously don't know who Rush is. Also, what's wrong with pony tails?
By the way, after I saw Al's movie I did just that. I traded in a Bronco and got a Prius. It is awesome!
YAY!! Good for you! Maybe now we can get others to follow your lead!! And, here's a video that will show you who Rush Limbaugh is. Al Franken hit it on the head years ago with his book, "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot." http://youtube.com/watch_fullscreen?video_id=2BPCQkSpvRE&l=223&t=OEgsToPDskIJHH52vsbWyfgY2lBprji9&fs=1&title=Rush%20Limbaugh%20on%20stem%20cells
That's a great clip. Thanks for posting it. (Right on, Al Franken.]
Do you care, do you know, that both scientists and Congresspeople were told not to use the phrase "global warming?" I'm listening to the Congressional testimony right now. Government lawyers were editing and changing scientific research.
Do you care?
Do you care?
And are you aware that some guy who had worked for Exxon and later went back to work for Exxon, from 2000 to 2005 literally deleted sections of findings from scientific reports about global warming?
I mean,really.
I mean,really.
While many may think Al deserves many awards, I think the Nobel Peace prize is not one of them. The fact is awarding Nobel prizes for environmental issues is their decision, but it makes them lose credibility in my eyes. There are serious wars and genocide in the world today, and we need some serious focus on peace there. This is distracting at best.
Point taken, Viking. If someone stepped in with a novel and effective solution for bringing peace to Iraq, or Darfur, or any of the other major hotspots of violence in the world right now, then I would imagine that this person would be more eligible for the Peace Prize. However, I don't think Gore's nomination is distracting. Rather, it underscores the important point that lasting peace does not come from simply finding some way to make people stop fighting momentarily, it comes from understanding and alleviating the pressures that throw them against each other in the first place. If we don't take serious steps to alleviate global warming, massive numbers of people, including some entire nations, will be displaced. That could make for quite a lot of anger and violence.
You can not reply as this discussion is Closed!
Featured Events
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
notehead