Et tu, Gorus?

The Nobel has been so political for so long that it is just not credible. While still hard to believe the history of the Nobel shows lots of crazy awards over the years.

You must have missed when the Peace Prize committee awarded one to Yassir Arafat, and another to Jimmy Carter, who did so much for middle-east peace, don’t’cha’know.
In fact, the ideological and philosophical divided in the Nobel committees mirrors the divide between hard science and social science departments at modern universities. One is concerned with facts, statistics and measurable truth, while the other is dominated by liberal ideology grounded in no reality that a scientist would recognize.
When Gore wins the Nobel for Chemistry or Economics for his AGW propaganda, then we should be scared. For now, ehh. Nothing new here.

Pardon my ignorance, and the off-topic question, but do we know CO2 levels are increasing atmospherically? Could someone point me to a paper or article dealing with that please? Just trying to inform myself on the basics at this point.

Geez I hate being petty, but does anyone else think that Gore is looking more and more like the Joker off of Batman?
There have been some shameful Nobel Peace prizes – this is sadly another. Will mankind ever quit falling for doomsday prophets (AKA “profit” in Gore’s case)?

What baffles me is what Algore’s efforts to educate the public on the dangers of anthropogenic global warming have to do with world peace. If the Goracle and his acolytes have their way and stop economic development in the third world, it could do more to harm world peace than just about anything I can think of.

Don’t quote me, but I believe we have gone from about 250 ppm to 370 ppm in the last century. This is no big deal when one looks at historical levels of CO2.

It’s even less of a deal when one considers the radiative forcing capability of CO2. To have the same effect as from 20-280ppm, you’d have to get to 1800ppm. So any potential warming we’ve seen cannot be due to CO2, whether it comes first or lags behind.

Response to ultimate175 and Jeff:
U175: if you are new to the climate science issues, Jeff’s (and he is correct) statement may be confusing if you are not familiar with the way radiation interacts with matter. All matter will absorb specific wavelengths of radiation, and not other wavelengths. As an atom absorbs this energy, it becomes excited and will release the energy at different wavelengths. The released energy can go in any direction. The sun (and other solar radiations) bombards the earth with a broad range of wavelengths and some of the energy is reflected back towards the atmosphere/space. CO2, being in the atmsophere, absorbs at a number of different wavelengths. As it releases the energy, some may go back to earth (the greenhouse effect). One aspect that climetologists appear to be missing in their computer models is that there are only a finite number of CO2 molecules in the atmsosphere and therefore only so much energy can be trapped and returned to the earth. Excess earth-radiated energy just heads right out into space.
Gore had it backwards in his film by intimating that CO2 increases preceded global warming throughout earth’s history. The opposite is true: as the earth warms, CO2 levels rise AFTER the earth warms – lagging the warming by about 800 years. As the earth warms, the CO2 principally comes from the oceans, which are a HUGE sink for CO2. This begs the question: if CO2 increases are not driving the earth’s warming, what is?
Folks who are called derogatorily “deniers” generally believe that the earth is warming due to natural processes, e.g. changes in solar radiation, and not due to man’s CO2 contribution to the environment. Proabably all “deniers” recognize the earth has been warming since about 1850 when the earth started coming out of a 400 year little ice age. But the $64,000 question is, “Is man causing greater warming?” When we know so little about what causes weather/climate change, it amazes me that we are even attempting to answer this question at this time. But man is both an arrogant and inquisitive beast so the scientific debate rages. Unfortuantely a lovely science debate has become a nasty political debate with Gore at this forefront. My opinion is that he is another doomsday prophet just following the trail of scads of doomsday prophets in mankind’s history. None have been right yet – we are still here and doing better than our forebearers.

Yeah, why didn’t this fat pig win for science/physics, if his claims are so credible?
Remember his speech, before the ’04 election, when he said of President Bush, “He betrayed this country! HE PLAYED ON OUR FEARS!?”
If you ask me, it is AlGore who is playing on other’s fears–with lies! I stand by my assertion that this pig should hang, for poisoning young minds.
Disclaimer: By stating that AlGore should hang, I was in no way, shape, or form threatening to do so myself. I am a peace-lovin’, libgressive-hatin’ redneck who loves my God, my wife, my daughter, my dogs, my cats, and my guns.
Okay, I don’t have any guns. But once I return from overseas in four or five years, I intend to purchase some, for my own protection, if we’re still allowed to bear arms under a socialist dictator, Hitlary Clinton.
Disclaimer: By stating the above, I was in no way, shape, or form conceding the ’08 election to Hitlary, but if you believe the pundits, she’s gonna be running the show come January ’09, and I have no faith in our GOP, in its current form, to stop her…

tetris writes:
In essence, you’re saying that the end justifies the means, and so all is well.
The big question is “What are their ends?” They will not decrease the temperature by one degree. They will not prevent nature from being ever changing. They do not pursuit scientific truth.
I think their “ends” is taking money out of our pockets and controlling as much of our lives as possible.
And anyone in the way, well….

Anthony
The source in the first post cited 11 errors found by the court. This post cites 9. Do you know why the sources disagree?
I have a way that Gore can make a genuine contribution to peace. He can go to Iran and teach Physics. That should set their nuclear program back by twenty years.

Re: CO2 emissions
It’s debatable, i.e. unknown, how much of the recent increase in atmospheric CO2 levels is due to human activities, including, but by no means restricted to, burning of fossil fuels.
However, it doesn’t matter, unless you are a liberal and need something to feel guilty about. Increasing CO2 levels either is or isn’t a problem sufficiently serious we need to do something about it. The source of the CO2 is irrelevant, because every molecule of CO2 in the atmosphere is the same as every other molecule and all contribute equaly to whatever problem might exist (or not as the case may be).
So is increasing CO2 levels a sufficiently serious problem we need to do something about it?
The answer is we don’t know, but it is telling that there is almost no credible scientific evidence directly linking rising CO2 levels to increasing temperatures. In fact, almost all the direct evidence links observed warming to other causes. This absence of evidence for CO2 driven warming is the dog that doesn’t bark in the whole debate, and to be perfectly honest it is something of a mystery why we are not seeing CO2 driven warming.
Doubtless, at some point we will get an answer when the politically motivated fog surrounding the issue clears. My 2c worth is that a negative feedback, perhaps water vapour, largely cancels out the effect of CO2, which is pretty small anyway, less than 1 degree C for the fabled doubling of atmospheric CO2.

For a detailed description of the errors in Gore’s AIT read http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/environment/gore.html
Bob

You know what , Rev?
The judge left out the claim by Gore that American cars can’t be sold in China, due to not meeting their strict environmental standards.
That was a rather obvious goof.
Also his claim that his science teacher who taught that South America and Africa never fit together in the dim past, he is not President Bush’s science advisor, but that was mostly told to his nutroot hand picked studio audience to get a cheap laugh, and break the tension of an hour of the full bore goracle in his bully pulpit.
There’s only so much fire and brimstone, even an acolyte can stomach.