This news just now broke on CNN. I was not even able to get the latest news on the internet yet as it's that new. If I find an article bringing this breaking news on his winning of the Nobel Peace Price more up to date I will link it.

If Gore wins the "Peace" prize, then you know the fix-is-in ... because what does Global Warming have to do with "Peace"?

It is just ludicrous that he was even nominated; along with Limbaugh! Of course, Limbaugh's nomination was to emphasize what a joke any Nobel Prize happens to be; outside of science.

Don't be so sad, Tad. I think Halliburton and Blackwater are taking up a collection for the new "Military-Industrial-Political Complex Blood and Gore Price for Those Who Have Waged Preemptive War Based on Lies." Known as "The Neocon Hun," the statuette that goes with the award---which includes a certificate suitable for mounting on your wall---features a grinning chimp sitting atop a pile of skulls, clutching a bleeding heart in its paws. Word is, it'll be a twofer the first time out with Bush and Cheney sharing the honor.

Doc Sarvis sympathizes, "Don't be so sad, Tad."

I'm not sad. In fact, and since I believe in the ultimate Irony, I find this situation teeth-grindingly exciting in a bitterly wry way. Swift would know what I think of the Lilliputians.

I think Halliburton and Blackwater are taking up a collection for the new "Military-Industrial-Political Complex Blood and Gore Price for Those Who Have Waged Preemptive War Based on Lies."

I get the same ironical twinge from knowing that these companies were used during the Clinton wars, too, and that the 'military/industrial' complex was managed and directed by Democratic congress' since WWII! I love the irony inherent when liars start to spin reality to suit their politics.

At the same time, the yellow-dogs of any party disgust me ad nauseam ... and the yellow-dog-democratics are the literal traitors that are so rottenly putrid, now ...

The ilk need a good bath and to brush their filed-down teeth ...

Limbaugh was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize?

You mean the "nomination" from the Landmark Legal Foundation? I think if you do a bit of fact-checking you'll find that organization isn't on the list of those who can nominate people for the award. That nomination is as legitimate as me casting "my" electoral vote.

Just a thought.

AM says, "You mean the "nomination" from the Landmark Legal Foundation? I think if you do a bit of fact-checking you'll find that organization isn't on the list of those who can nominate people for the award. That nomination is as legitimate as me casting "my" electoral vote."

You talk about 'legitimate' and fail to mention that Gore in no way fostered 'Peace'? No mention of the grievious errors in science he allowed in a film he did not make, but takes all credit for?

As was mentioned: Limbaugh's nomination was a JOKE!

A big-fat-joke on the Prize Committee and their effort to promote socialism for the United States -- the last real bastion of capitalism on the planet, today ...

...........TO THE SWIFTBOATS..!!!!!!!!
...........

.........that Alfred Nobel was a scumsucking liberal lefty Democrat traitor !!!...........

What you fail to recognize, Tad, is a simple fact: You misstated the facts when you wrote: "It is just ludicrous that he was even nominated; along with Limbaugh!" Your opinion about Gore's nomination (and he must've been nominated because you have to be nominated to get the Nobel Peace Prize) is not the point I made. My point rested on the second part of your statement, that Rush Limbaugh had been nominated. The fact of the matter is, he wasn't. Somebody may'be said he should've been nomiamted, or he should get the Nobel Peace Prize. But he was not nominated for the simple reason that the Landmark Legal Foundation is not on the list of those parties eligible to place nomimation before the prize committee.

"As was mentioned: Limbaugh's nomination was a JOKE!"

Again, that's not what you said, Tad. You said the so-called "nomination" was made to "emphasize what a joke any Nobel Prize happens to be.

I realize why you can't stick to the facts, because they're just not with you on this one. But you'd do better to admit it when you step into the shitpile of misstatement. Come on, you can do it: Be an adult about it.

Talk about irony.

There's a Nobel prize for fiction?

Back on topic:

Congratulations to Al Gore and the UN body, and kudos to the Nobel committee for calling attention to potentially earth-shattering developments.

Nobel?
Dy-no-mite!
Jimmie Walker

A well-deserved award.

It's pretty amazing that Gore has been this successful reinventing himself after a presidential loss. Looking backwards -- Dole, Dukakis, Mondale, McGovern, Humphrey, Goldwater -- I can't think of one whose stature grew after the election like this.

I'd vote for Gore in a heartbeat if he was running for president.

I WISH I VOTED FOR AL GORE IN 2000!!!!!!!!!!! instead of that lying, deceitful, corporation protecting, Constition destroying, war profiteering criminal I voted for. God I hate Bush and Cheney for what harm they have done to America, Iraq and the World.

Moremusicnow says, "[...}"

Yeah, everyone here believes you voted for Bush. Uh-huh, sure they do ...

TADOWE

I'm truly sorry that life and the VietNam War has broken your heart . . . however, that's your problem.

Moving on . . .

Congratuations to Al Gore and to all those who contributed to this award.

Al Gore is a great American and a credit to the Democratic Party.

Why Is There No Nobel War Prize?

The Work is Just As Hard!

No, please don't get me wrong, I voted for Bush because I believed in what he stood for in the primaries (2000) and voted for him again because of the Iraq War(2004). I was lied to and we're all facing the consequences of this inept administration. This war is bankrupting our country as Bush/Cheney do nothing but help the Corporation. I hate our politcs and politicians who sit while America burns and will vote for changing all of them , but especiall cleaning out the Republican Party..I like Al Gore or Ron Paul.

Tad, my point is not "that Gore is a Democratic." I never even mentioned his political affiliation. You're the one who brought that up. Are you arguing with yourself? Of course you are!

I realize that you consider it "patronizing BS" when you get caught out, making inaccurate statements. And I think I can understand why you think you get called out because of something to do with "the ration you and your ilk feed anyone who has the temerity to disagree with your Leftist/Democratic dictates." Being wrong is one thing. But admitting it? Well, that requires emotional maturity.

As for "FO, yourself, Buttocks-Kisser," I've checked the thread and nowhere do I tell you to Fuck Off.

That would be making it about you, and not your idiotic statements.

On topic?

Teddy Roosevelt didn't get the Nobel Peace Prize because he started or fought in the Russo-Japanese War. He got the prize for putting things together in such a way that something good came of it. Gore has helped call attention to something of monumentla importance that needed calling attention to. Nicely done.

"Twinpac makes me the subject..."

"You are making me the subject by issuing lying innuendo!"

Posted by tadowe at 2007-09-10 08:27 AM

"because you both just can't resist making me the subject!"

Posted by tadowe at 2007-09-10 08:12 AM

"...at each prior attempt to make me the subject..."

Posted by tadowe at 2007-09-10 08:01 AM

"...please keep making me the subject for your reflexive responses, Alex."

Posted by tadowe at 2007-09-10 07:56 AM

AM reveals, "... my point is not "that Gore is a Democratic." I never even mentioned his political affiliation."

Really, and that's the trouble with you Leftist/Democratic -- you think that if there isn't any 'proof' then you can take any position in discussion! You only fool yourself with that kind of ostrich-like thinking. There is no other reason for you (or the majority of partisans) to make a big to-do over this award for politics.

It is just too bad that the Nobel committee isn't honest enough to provide a category for political excellence, eh? Like, Carter would have never won a prize, if that were the case ...

Go fool a yellow-dog ...

Hans says, "..." [please read the links, above]

Wow! Hansi!

You continue to provide the demonstration that my claims are accurate! Look how many times you've bothered to collect quotes about the times I'm made the subject; to avoid the actual discussion(s) presented.

And, the links to my statements, and which also demonstrate the consistency of my stance(s) and the efforts made to turn me into the subject for bothering to disagree with reason to support my position, on subject.

Danke, Kuchen.

I like Al Gore or Ron Paul.

A Gore-vs-Paul presidential race would be incredible. Both have mastered something that I find very rare in politics today -- the ability to run for reasons that are larger than the presidency. Today, all we seem to get are careful incrementalists like Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney.

You know, Tadowe, it occurs to me that your goal is to make yourself the subject in as many threads as possible. And then whining about it.

You're pretty good at it.

Go Al! Go Al!

Yay-aahhh! Yahooey!

Talk about twisted panties on the Drudge today! Rcade, this may be the ultimate test for your servers.

Go Al! Go Al!

Hope he's Prez while Jimmy Carter is still young enough to serve our country in a major diplomatic role. Secretary of State or U.N. ambassador would be nice.

Hope is reborn for America.

There's a Nobel prize for fiction?
Posted by Redman at 2007-10-12 06:36 AM |

Yes, there is. It went to Doris Lessing. Yesterday. You didn't know that? You must not look at the DR very carefully. *Sigh*

"Yes, there is. It went to Doris Lessing. Yesterday. You didn't know that? You must not look at the DR very carefully. *Sigh*"

Literacy and literature do not rank high in the world of conservative "thought," Doc.

Hans

The Nobel Peace Prize is a "joke," according to at least one flummoxed and narcissistic poster here today.

Then why do the RightieTighties get so worked up over Al Gore winning it?

Because even in the reptillian mind the Nobel Peace Prize is i-m-p-o-r-t-a-n-t.

This war is bankrupting our country as Bush/Cheney do nothing but help the Corporation.

Posted by moremusicnow at 2007-10-12 06:56 AM

I find it humorous that some of the posters here on the DR don't understand simple economics. I think what moremusicnow is saying above is that we need to increase the taxes on the corporations. I don't know why this never sinks in, but any increase in taxes on the corporations will be paid by the consumers. As you all know, the corporation has a bottom line. To meet this bottom line, the corporation will increase the prices for its goods and services when higher taxes are levied.

Now, on topic, I've heard that Al Gore's movie has been proven to have several falsehoods. I haven't seen it, nor do I care to see his propaganda. However, I have seen the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" (or something like that), a movie which Al Gore claimed to be a very important film. What a joke. The movie was completely ridiculous. In my opinion, that Al Gore won the Nobel prize for his propaganda film only cheapens the Nobel prize.

I don't think Al Gore wants to step on Hillary's toes in this election but I hope she recruits him for a position in her administration, one with some really big teeth, so he can continue his work on global warming with the full faith and confidence of the U.S. government at his back.

"You know, Tadowe, it occurs to me that your goal is to make yourself the subject in as many threads as possible. And then whining about it.

"You're pretty good at it."

Nail on the head, Ted.

Good job!

Hans

"...a movie which Al Gore claimed to be a very important film."

Bullshit.

Al Gore, indeed, is so impressed by the argument that he told Variety, "The Day After Tomorrow presents us with a great opportunity to talk about the scientific realities of climate change. Millions of people will be coming out of theaters on Memorial Day weekend asking the question, 'Could this really happen?' I think we need to answer that question."

Gore and Arafat.....two good reasons to ignore the importance of this prize! Hillary's socialized medical plan to ruin this country will be the next winner!!!

TED

"You know, Tadowe, it occurs to me that your goal is to make yourself the subject in as many threads as possible. And then whining about it.

"You're pretty good at it."

That's a PERFECT obversation, Ted.

It is just ludicrous that he was even nominated; along with Limbaugh!

Limbaugh wasn't nominated. But Hitler was. He didn't get it, either. Nor did Neville Chamberlain, Stalin, or Mussolini. But Teddy Roosevelt, the Int'l Committee of the Red Cross, Woodrow Wilson, Albert Schweitzer, George Marshall, the UN High Commissioner for Regugees, Dag Hammerskjold, Martin Luther King, UNICEF, Amnesty Interntional, Mother Teresa, Lech Walesa, Bishop Tutu, Elie Wiesel, Mikhail Gorbachev, Aung San Suu Kyi, Rigoberta Menchu, Nelson Mandela (before Bush declared him a victim of Saddam Hussein), Mohammed ElBaradei, Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank, and Al Gore did.

But you guys don't care about the Nobel Peace Prize, do you? That's why you're pissing and moaning about it this morning, right?

Are you jealous because the Nobel Peace Prize hasn't been as trashed as the Presidential Medal of Freedom, with such stellar laureates as L. Paul Bremmer, Tommy Franks, and George Tenet?

LOL

ROFLMAO........ROFLMAO........
ROFLMAO........

Climate control and natural resources are now tied hand in hand. The demand for oil/scarce elements/gas etc is rising radpidly. But it is now more expensive to mine them due to limited sources and creates more pollution in the process. Gore raising the issue of carbon pollution brings to forefront the control of usage. Control of usage of scarce resources will mitigate conflicts over said resources in the near future.

Making taxation pollution based gives an incentive to conserve more.

This is why he got the Peace Prize.

I smell a spammer........POLLM.

Doc bends logic, "...what has peace got to do with climate change? Well, an awful lot if you consider the clearly sensible prediction that many of the wars of the future will be directly caused, or certainly exacerbated, by climate change."

Well, to the extent that Global Warming (GW) has caused wars due to changes in local environements, and since it began: 18,000 years ago, or so.

That start of GW caused stupendous changes in localities; e.g., the Mississippi River began at that time and Niagra Falls was formed in just a few thousand years after GW began! Indeed, vast ice sheets covered the land, from the Arctic down to the latitude of Kansas City. Entire classes of animals died out; e.g., Saber-toothed tigers, Mastadons, Mammoths, Great Cave Bear, Irish Elk, Giant sloths the size of horses, and more recently the Dodo and the Aurochs.

So, the South may invade to the North ...

... oh ... never mind ... they are already ...

"Climate control and natural resources are now tied hand in hand."

This says absolutely nothing! For one thing, anyone who thinks that mankind can control the weather -- lives in never-never-land ...

Mankind only produces a FRACTION of the same pollutants generated in Nature! It is hubris to think that "we" can somehow change the weather; even if we got rid of 3/4 of humanity and ended ALL our CO2 and methane production!

Anyone saying differently is a purposeful and calculating liar ...

Gore won the Nobel. Bush will win indictment from Germany once he's a private citzen for kidnapping and torturing one of their nationals. Yen and yang.

It's simple economics, really. As long as the demand doesn't change, as fossil fuels become harder to find, their price will increase. Higher prices for fossil fuels allow competing technologies to become more cost effective. Eventually, the competing technologies will become less expensive than using gasoline. Then, and only then, we will become less dependant on oil. In a market driven economy such as ours, that is the plain and simple truth.

Also, loved that parady song, "climatepolice.com"

That was hilarious.

Doc bends logic

That statement was clearly linked to an opinion piece in the UK Guardian.

I can bend dental floss, though. With my bare teeth.

This is a joke.


Gore wins the Peace Prize for creating a political movie about Global warming??

Even though he may win the Nobel Peace Prize today, Al Gore was handed a humiliating set back yesterday in a British court which ruled that there were 9 instances in his film Inconvenient Truths that were not supported by evidence or scientific consensus:


In what is a rare judicial ruling on what children can see in the class-room, Mr Justice Barton was at pains to point out that the "apocalyptic vision" presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change.

"It is plainly, as witnessed by the fact that it received an Oscar this year for best documentary film, a powerful, dramatically presented and highly professionally produced film," he said in his ruling. "It is built around the charismatic presence of the ex-Vice-Presi-dent, Al Gore, whose crusade it now is to persuade the world of the dangers of climate change caused by global warming.

"It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion but that it is a political film."
Some of the specific non-truths (lies) illustrated in the film include:
The claim that sea levels could rise by 20ft "in the near future" was dismissed as "distinctly alarmist".

Such a rise would take place "only after, and over, millennia". Mr Justice Burton added: "The ar-mageddon scenario he predicts, inso-far as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus."

A claim that atolls in the Pacific had already been evacuated was supported by "no evidence", while to suggest that two graphs showing carbon dioxide levels and temperatures over the last 650,000 years were an "exact fit" overstated the case.

The only person who should be afraid is Hillary.

Gore just won the Nobel Prize.

If he ran for President, I think he'd beat her.

I'd vote for Gore over Hillary.

Doc says, "That statement was clearly linked to an opinion piece in the UK Guardian."

Oh? You were just being informative and not presuming any truth to the article, I suppose?

Why do you all bother with these excuses, all the time?

"I can bend dental floss, though. With my bare teeth."

This is a misdirection into humor, so that you don't have to actually comment on the disagreement with the 'Guardian' ... isn't that correct, also, Doc?

"I'd vote for Gore...."


I think the world is saying they'd vote for Gore, and that please God someone like Gore becomes president of the United States.

Doc says, "That statement was clearly linked to an opinion piece in the UK Guardian."

Oh? You were just being informative and not presuming any truth to the article, I suppose?

For once, you suppose correctly. It's known as adding some information to the discussion. But I didn't expect you to understand that. And, of course, you didn't.

Whistle "Send in the Clowns" and you come a-runnin.

LOL

""So, a judge in Great Britain deemed that Gore's film was too politicized and contained too many blatant factual inaccuracies to be deemed appropriate as a teaching tool in their school system. Yet, he wins the 'Peace Prize' based predominantly on this film?""

Gee Jeff, I never thought you were just a blatant liar before. The opposite of what you say is true, are you too lazy to check out Doc's link or are you afraid of accurate information??>?
Quite honestly Jeff, I'm surprised, I did think that you at least tried to inform yourself. Too much Kool Aide.


The British judge, with his ruling, has actually validated the core Gore message.
www.huffingtonpost.com

Thanks for pointing that out, Danni.

The British judge, with his ruling, has actually validated the core Gore message.


Don't agree? Check it out and get back to me.

Danni,


I am well aware of what the ruling said.


Why don't you click my link...or are you too busy slupring Kool Aid?

But,

but,

I have a picture of Al Gore getting out a plane, driving in a car and using a light bulb.

Surely there are more deserving candidates for the Peace Prize like George Bush or the leader of Burma.

"Mr Justice Barton was at pains to point out that the "apocalyptic vision" presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change......It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion but that it is a political film."

-Today, all we seem to get are careful incrementalists like Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney.

Today, as in days past, a President has to either have the backing of the American people, the moderates and Indies and at least some of the opposition Party to actually get anything done, or they wind up with situations like Iraq, or, domestically, decades of stalemate on healthcare.

I'd like Dennis the K to go in tomorrow and independently set up his policies, too.

Ain't gonna happen.

""Why don't you click my link...or are you too busy slupring Kool Aid?""

Jeff, I did check your link as the quote below proves. Your link was to a very dishonest attempt to discredit the Gore film and totally misrepresents what the Judge found. Conveniently, it doesn't bother to mention that the Judge decided the film could be shown because it was a valuable piece of information for the students.
Either you were misled by your link or you purposely looked for and found an article to support your own bias. Either way it seems pretty ridiculous for you to say I was busy slurping kool aide when Doc's link was right there on the thread with the real truth available for anyone with a mind open enough to look at it which obviously you scrolled past and didn't examine. So, it seems that you win in the slurping contest. Better slow down that stuff is fattening.



""The hoodwinking of the people continues...""

Doc gets obtuse, "For once, you suppose correctly."

BS! You take everyone for a fool, don't you? You have no respect for anyone and don't care, either. You are anonymous, and can play the stooge for your party. Just reading the article shows your bias, and if no one had ever bothered to read the Leftist/Democratic cut&pastes you constantly present to view.

"It's known as adding some information to the discussion. But I didn't expect you to understand that. And, of course, you didn't."

Again ... who do you think you are fooling? Only the Leftist/Democratics on this site would stoop to defending such idiocy. Indeed! I just mentioned to someone else how jejune it is to suppose that since their is no 'proof' of your intentions -- then you can come down on any side you care to ...

In this case an article read, gathererd and re-broadcast for partisan information, is accomplished. However, the reader, the gatherer and the 'informant' provide the commentary to present their own bias', as well.

Then, sophomorically denied because deduction is not 'proof'. A very scientific excuse ... but an excuse nevertheless.

"Whistle "Send in the Clowns" and you come a-runnin."

More humorous misdirection to avoid the idiocy of claiming that GW will cause wars, so Gore is a wonderful peacemaker ...

Along with the scientific misinformation of "his" film ... made by others ... but which he narrates as an ad to advance his personal political career ...

I'd vote for Gore in a heartbeat if he was running for president.

Posted by rcade at 2007-10-12 06:41 AM



nnnoooooooooooooooo


come on....would you really??


ha ha

uh oo.

WE BREAK INTO THIS THREAD TO BRING YOU BREAKING NEWS>

dot dot dot dot......( thats the old teletype going in the background....and for you young punks, the teletype was the fastest thing going for info......)

DATELINE.......CAMP DAVID........1978 or there abouts.

jimmy carter and arafat win nobel peace prize.....

carter announces peace in the middle east in our lifetime..

hhhhhhhhmmmmmmm wonder what ever happened to that??????????

You take everyone for a fool, don't you?

That's a rhetorical question, isn't it? But I'll give it a go, anyway:

No, I don't.

But you're one of those who is so taken.


Don't you love farce?
My fault I fear,
I thought that you'd want what I want,
Sorry my dear
But where are the clowns
There ought to be clowns
Quick send in the clowns

All you gotta do is put your lips together and blow.

LOL

DATELINE.......CAMP DAVID........1978 or there abouts. jimmy carter and arafat win nobel peace prize.....

Fact Check: You flunk (again)!

The 1978 Nobel Peace Prize went to Mohamed Anwar Al-Sadat and Menachem Begin for making peace between Egypt and Israel (which peace has not been shattered since).

The 1994 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, and Yitzhak Rabin "for their efforts to create peace in the Middle East."

The 2002 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Jimmy Carter "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rihts, and to promote economic and social development."

Got it straight now?

And Congrats to Al Gore on his Nobel Prize. No one could have deserved it more.

No matter the cause of the current climate change, a large part of the responsibility for the awareness of this problem by the peoples and nations of the world goes to Al.

Al Gore may not have "invented" climate change solutions, but, like the Internet, he had a great deal to do with initiating awareness and helping create an environment for solutions.

Doc can't face the subject of Gore, so ..."That's a rhetorical question, isn't it? But I'll give it a go, anyway: No, I don't."

Yes, you do. That's so, because you completely fail to address the point: Gore's movie is not helping end future wars. A premis that is ludicrous, on its face, and nothing more than an excuse to recognize Gore's award as somehow valid vis a vis 'Peace'. You play the 'informant' to both sides, only one of which agrees with the main premis.

Of course, you can *prove* me incorrect in my conclusion, if you acknowledge the stupidity of the author and the Guardian, which entity printed the crap. Or, conversly, *prove* me correct by supporting the argument. As it stands now? You're just another Leftist/Democratic runaway 'intellectual'.

"But you're one of those who is so taken."

That's what I said, Mr Imustconfessbyfreud.

"I just mentioned to someone else how jejune it is to suppose..."

Oooh! Jejune! Cela etait si chic et sophistique!

Merde!

A big-fat-joke on the Prize Committee and their effort to promote socialism for the United States -- the last real bastion of capitalism on the planet, today ...

Posted by tadowe

Tad, now that Bush has accepted man's role in global warming, I'm sure he'll be proud an American has won another Nobel Prize.

Unlike the rightwing "America-last"ers here on Drudge.

""A big-fat-joke on the Prize Committee and their effort to promote socialism for the United States -- the last real bastion of capitalism on the planet, today ...""

Which outsources much of the manufacturing economy to.......drum roll please.....COMMUNIST CHINA!!!!
BTW, Communist China now can brag that they enjoy the most polluted environment on Earth. Yay!!!


Capitalism.....hardly
More like.....Opportunism.

We have switched from a regulated capitalist economy to a laissez faire opportunism economy which provides neither jobs nor manufacturing capacity but does reward crony capitalist opportunists with profits.

""
doc.......please..........the fact is, of course, that they awarded them with this prize and it didnt mean shit......""

BLT wipe the egg off of your face before coming back here and posting.

Yeah, and the "left" just imagines that the truths exposed in MM's movies are true because we hate America. I see the method of the right clearly these days, if a film maker or writer exposes something that discredits the right or embarrasses them they simply lie about it and deny, deny, deny. They know the "left" won't be fooled but don't care because their base will be and that is all they really care about anyway. When you have an audience that believes it is patriotic to believe things that intellectually some know not to be true is a virtue it is easy to keep your base obedient and even happy to be fooled.

Gore '08?

"Gore confidantes aren't optimistic.

Former Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile tells The Note,

"I don't know if this will re-shape him or allow him to move back gracefully into politics. I believe Gore wants to be above the fray and not back in the middle."

But, Brazile said, he can wield his enhanced power with an endorsement (one he hopes turns out better than his support of Howard Dean, of course):

...but does reward crony capitalist opportunists with profits.

Posted by danni at 2007-10-12 09:57 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Nice compliment from you to Al Gore for his capitalist movie venture.

Danni,


I am well aware of what the ruling said.


Why don't you click my link...or are you too busy slupring Kool Aid?

Posted by JeffJ


I did click your link, and some of the objections/criticisms in it are minor. Gore was HARDLY dealt a "humiliting setback".

You remain a liar, though, for your post - or were you just plain wrong?

.will you be calling leonardo and sucking his dick again???????

Why would he do that? He's not a music teacher.

A Nobel Peace Prize for a climate change documentary? Climate change has recently been a very devisive issue. Hardly leading to "Peace."

"A Nobel Peace Prize for a climate change documentary?"

I think it MAY have been for a bit more than just the documentary.

Danni mocks (go figure), "Which outsources much of the manufacturing economy to.......drum roll please.....COMMUNIST CHINA!!!!"

When Japan was being 'outsourced' as our manufacturing economy, we changed their government from a de facto oligarchy of a few wealthy families (Zaibatsu); e.g., Mitsubishi, Honda, Suzuki, Daihatsu, etc.; and turned it into a parliamentary democracy with almost universal participation. We successfully exported capitalism to Japan and it reinforced the evolution of the country away from the Samurai tradition/oligarchy and is assisting its evolution that way, now.

Hopefully, China will be another example of the success of exporting capitalism and democracy so that the world can be as free as our nation ...

Sanan claims, " think it MAY have been for a bit more than just the documentary."

Such as ...?

Why would he do that? He's not a music teacher.

Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2007-10-12 10:09 AM | Reply


ah another good one from the doc sarvis library

OOPS nevermind..its the same old shit over and over again.

yuk yuk...


danni...the dont mean shit remark was for the bullshit award given to carter and arafat........two people who time has proved should give it back.........

time will tell with this one.......but again.....I think its great that he wins this........(and right now, you and hundreds of other posters.....well okay maybe one or two.....are waiting on me to finish that statement........

hee hee

There is no such thing as global warming.

- right-wing flat-earth society

Sanan claims, " think it MAY have been for a bit more than just the documentary."

Such as ...?

Maybe years of work, study, and advocacy on the subject? Whether you agree with his (and other's) conclusions does not negate the work done and the effort expended.

That an American has won one of the most honored award in the world, should be of great pride to most Americans, but no the usually right wing slugs have seen fit to try an denegrate Mr. Gore's award.

The Honor that almost the whole world has for Mr. Gore must be a pain in the ASS of all of this right wing hacks!!!!

Watching Faux Noise this morning one can see the disgust these partisian American, who call themselves newscasters feel for Mr. Gore, what a pathatic group, where do they find these Assholes????

Well done Mr. Gore give um Hell!!!!!!!!!

That an American has won one of the most honored award in the world, should be of great pride to most Americans, but no the usually right wing slugs have seen fit to try an denegrate Mr. Gore's award.

The Honor that almost the whole world has for Mr. Gore must be a pain in the ASS of all of this right wing hacks!!!!

Watching Faux Noise this morning one can see the disgust these partisian American, who call themselves newscasters feel for Mr. Gore, what a pathatic group, where do they find these Assholes????

Well done Mr. Gore give um Hell!!!!!!!!!

Brace yourself, Celisary, for some fire from the section of the Peanut Gallery labeled "Nativists and Xenophobes."

Faux Noise = not real noise.

If it's not noise, it's real news you are saying, celisary?

I get a kick out of people trying to diminish the status of a person or organization with their word games. They take it to such an extreme they actually do the opposite of what they intend to do. Thank god for it, though. It is tiresome reading the usual drivel from the usual suspects.

Jeff, I did check your link as the quote below proves. Your link was to a very dishonest attempt to discredit the Gore film and totally misrepresents what the Judge found. Conveniently, it doesn't bother to mention that the Judge decided the film could be shown because it was a valuable piece of information for the students.
Either you were misled by your link or you purposely looked for and found an article to support your own bias. Either way it seems pretty ridiculous for you to say I was busy slurping kool aide when Doc's link was right there on the thread with the real truth available for anyone with a mind open enough to look at it which obviously you scrolled past and didn't examine. So, it seems that you win in the slurping contest. Better slow down that stuff is fattening.



""The hoodwinking of the people continues...""

Posted by danni at 2007-10-12 09:30 AM

Well, there you have it, an article that you agree with has to be factual but an article you disagree with is false. Now would you care to explain that open mind you are talking about?

""Hopefully, China will be another example of the success of exporting capitalism and democracy so that the world can be as free as our nation ...""

Hey TAdowe, why don't you hold your breath til that happens.
Naive or just total denial of reality???

And I love this...""We successfully exported capitalism to Japan and it reinforced the evolution of the country away from the Samurai tradition/oligarchy and is assisting its evolution that way, now.""

And just think, it only took one world war, 2 atomic bombs and total defeat for the Japanese to give up their traditions. I think Communist China will require far more than did Japan to ever become a free nation. MOre likely scenario is that the corporatists will align themselves with the communists (as they are already doing) and give both China and the US fascism. Can anyone rightly argue that we are as free today as we were in 1969?? The SC pretty much answered that question this week in the most dramatic and frightening example of the erosion of our rights by refusing to even hear the case of the man who was renditioned, tortured and left in Albania...wrongly because he was innocent of any crime. The SC by refusing to hear the case just trashed habeas corpus and several other guaranteed rights. why no one is talking about that case is amazing to me.

"If it's not noise, it's real news you are saying,"

Sorry, you need a logic refresher...

Not noise does not necessarily equal news. It could be gibberish, propaganda, nonsense, horse manure, or blatant falsehoods. Right?

Come on, you Sad Sacks of the Right. Even the White House says, Be Happy!

Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2007-10-12 10:25 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e



That an American has won one of the most honored award in the world, should be of great pride to most Americans, but no the usually right wing slugs have seen fit to try an denegrate Mr. Gore's award.




NO NO NO NO NO...

as I said.....WAY TO GO AL.....so to celebrate he should call up leonardo and compare how much money they each made on thier little movies.

no really......maybe he can be on top this time....


hee hee......yuk yuk......


get it....its a pun.....be on top....get it....on top of money list AND ON TOP OF LEONARDO.....get it...

come on admit.....thats funny.........

Goat,

I get a kick out of people trying to diminish the status of a person or organization with their word games.

Is it possible for you to hold the other righties on this thread equally responsible?

Danni,

Regarding:

""The hoodwinking of the people continues...""


I didn't post that - you did.


It was in the article I linked; an article that is obviously biased.


I was only pointing out that a British judge found that Gore's movie was a political piece (based largely on scientific evidence) that contains some obvious inaccuracies.

Does this discredit the entire movie?

Of course not.

It does however taint it a bit.



Gore is the prototypical zealot: The message is king.

The occasional pesky fact that contradicts the message is to be ignored and exaggeration and the occasional falsehood are perfectly acceptable tactics if these dishonesties strengthen the message.

From now on





I'm going to





triple


and quadruple





the spaces




in my



posts





too

Way to go Al !!!

Now RUN in 2008 would ya?

Ya gotta love it. Bush-ling loves to talk about his legacy. Gore lives his.
Two Democrats getting the Nobel while is struggling through his imploding office.

Ironically Carter, Clinton and Gore just grew more powerful in their international influence after their terms in office... meanwhile the last pack the reputz leadership just hit the golf course and irrelevancy... like Rove hopes to do.

Oh yeah... HIllary who helped impeach Nixon... is what?... oh yeah... a contender for the presidency... Kenny Starr... now where is he.... oh yeah irrelevant... like the rest of the blow hard conservative bullshitters... Then there is Cheney... who has sent his wife out doing preemptive damage control...

Ya gotta love it... In your face assholes.

Not noise does not necessarily equal news. It could be gibberish, propaganda, nonsense, horse manure, or blatant falsehoods. Right??


Wrong.
gibberish, propaganda, nonsense, horse manure, or blatant falsehoods IS noise when it comes to news.

But spin it as you like. I'm sure celery stick appreciates the defense. I still get a kick out of it.

Could we have another Clinton/Gore candidacy? it would certainly be interesting. So far, that combo hasn't been beaten'.

""The occasional pesky fact that contradicts the message is to be ignored and exaggeration and the occasional falsehood are perfectly acceptable tactics if these dishonesties strengthen the message.""

Jeff, if gore is even half right then the coming catastrophe is of such proportions that yes, those pesky contradictory facts can and should be ignored because....what harm comes from taking the catastrophic consequences of global warming too seriously. No danger increases because we listen to Al Gore and find out some day he is wrong but great danger could result from ignoring him and finding out later he is right.

That's because after Carter won the Nobel peace prise it became a tool of the libs.

Sorry, I missed spelled prize. I know you libs will call me down for that.

Sorry, I missed spelled prize. I know you libs will call me down for that.

Sorry, I missed spelled prize. I know you libs will call me down for that.

Sorry, I missed spelled prize. I know you libs will call me down for that.

It's called intellectual honesty, Danni.


The guy is preaching Armageddon. If he's going to do so, I would like to think that he'd damn-well want to be as accurate and factual as possible, I know I would.

Just because you like the messenger and the message doesn't mean that intellectual dishonesty should be excused.

"Have any renown conservatives won the Nobel Prize in the past generation or two?"

Depends on how one would define "renown conservative," but I would offer:

FREDRIK WILLEM DE KLERK President of the Republic of South Africa. (1992)

LECH WALESA, Poland. Founder of Solidarity, campaigner for human rights. (1983)

MENACHEM BEGIN, Prime Minister of Israel. (1978)

HENRY A. KISSINGER, Secretary of State, State Department, Washington. (1973)

Have any renown conservatives won the Nobel Prize in the past generation or two?

How would one know? As far as I know they don't shout out their party affiliations when they accept their prize.

Of course if it is a politician it is easy to know.

I would say that Begn and Kissinger fit the description, Hans.


I am not familiar with the other 2.

I'm a little late in the thread but I think this does make a mockery of the Peace prize. It's bad enough that a terrorist can win it (Arafat) but to win a peace prize for something that has nothing to do with Peace is a joke.

Sorry again, I mis spelled, mis spelled. I guess I'm so excited that Gore won that I'm having trouble with my spelling.

"That's because after Carter won the Nobel peace prise it became a tool of the libs."

Let's review:

MUHAMMAD YUNUS and GRAMEEN BANK (2006)

INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY and MOHAMED ELBARADEI (2005)

WANGARI MAATHAI (2004)

SHIRIN EBADI (2003)

Can you name one conservative that has won?

what harm comes from taking the catastrophic consequences of global warming too seriously. No danger increases because we listen to Al Gore and find out some day he is wrong but great danger could result from ignoring him and finding out later he is right

So -- take him seriously, Danni.

This is what I don't understand. Everytime the global warming theme appears as a thread it's the same old thing. Are you handwringers taking Al Gore's advice? Good for you if you are! If you aren't -- then take it. What is there to talk about?

Joe Stalin

"Can you name one conservative that has won?"

Depends on how you define "conservative," but I offer:

FREDRIK WILLEM DE KLERK President of the Republic of South Africa. (1992)

LECH WALESA, Poland. Founder of Solidarity, campaigner for human rights. (1983)

MENACHEM BEGIN, Prime Minister of Israel. (1978)

HENRY A. KISSINGER, Secretary of State, State Department, Washington. (1973)

I was flying on a cargo flight. I was allowed to sit behind the captain. The first officer was telling a story about his first assignment flying a corporate aircraft. He said they used to fly Gores father and staff. That included "Beany". I said who was beany. He said that was Al Gore. His father used to yell at him because he always had difficulty understanding the subject matter and Gores father had to continually stop and explain things to him. The crew thought he was dumb, which he is, so they nick named him Beany. (The kid with the propeller on his head)

Certainly more impressive then Gore and Carter.

Ozzie,

If he's so dumb, how come he had the foresight to spur development of the internet as a tool of commerce and information sharing, not just a redundant network for the DOD?

How come he managed to make his way into government in the first place, and become VP of the United States? (OK, not a good question, considering the current occupant of the White House...)

How has he managed to make millions from speaking engagements and making his film?

How has he managed to win a Nobel Peace Prize?

Hardly achievements I would consider from a "dumb" person. Is it possible this is just sour grapes from the Conservative Right, who lately can only be defined by rubber stamping Bush policies and failed attempts to hide homosexuality and pedophilia in their party? Oh, I think so...

Well, Al is in good company now. He's in bed with that great proponent of peace, Yassir Arafat.

If we "avert," or is it "delay the onset" or is it "reverse" the prospect of global warming, that'll avoid the disruption that is certain to ensue from dislocation of people and redisposition of resources.

Let's see. What do we do first. Ah. got it. Reduce the heat emanating from the sun. These darn nearby stars do these disruptive things to their solar systems. Why even Neptune is experiencing warming of that globe.

Al has received more widespread recognition than L. Ron Hubbard, professional science fiction writer, and founder of Dianetics. Mr. Gore, you don't approach Mr. Hubbard's abilities as a science fiction writer. And the devotees of Mr. Hubbard's theories are much more fervid.

I nominate L. Ron Hubbard. Oh, you can't receive the award posthumously. Hmm. Well, there go those secularists again, denying the existence of people in an after-life as being real and contemperanous with life on Earth. I suppose that I'll need to solicit donations and organize my own award-giving group, recognizing what I think are extraordinary human accomplishments, but with worthies selected not limited to those who have not yet "gone to glory."

Now. Hmm. Where to get the money to endow my fund? That's a poser. Let's see. Mr. Nobel earned his money from dynamite. Well, maybe I can sell some biohazardous material, and earn enough money so that my group founded with funds raised from creating a murderous capability, can pontificate on the value of "peace." Get it? Got it. Good.

"Certainly more impressive then Gore and Carter."

Doesn't matter.

Gore and Carter will always be associated with other Nobel Peace Prize winners such as:

DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS (1999)

INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO BAN LANDMINES (ICBL) and JODY WILLIAMS (1997)

ELIE WIESEL (1986)

DESMOND MPILO TUTU (1984)

MOTHER TERESA (1979)

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL (1977)

ANDREI DMITRIEVICH SAKHAROV (1975)

ALBERT SCHWEITZER (1952)

THE AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE (1947)

WOODROW WILSON (1919)

"Oh, you can't receive the award posthumously."

Oops:

DAG HJALMAR AGNE CARL HAMMARSKJOLD , Secretary General of the United Nations (awarded the Prize posthumously in 1961).

Johnson,

Where does one start? Yassir Arafat was responsible for killing who knows how many people, but he tried to turn things around, and attempted to bring about some kind of peace. Should he get any credit for doing such works? Not in your eyes. So by such logic, there's no motivation for attempting to stop violence. Such a good Christian you are.

This whole "transferring the responsibility of global warming to the sun" thing has gotten a little tired. All the malarkey about the increase in the sun's output has been dis-proven repeatedly on these threads. Let's move on, shall we?

Trying to lump Gore in with a nutjob like L. Ron Hubbard is typical of you folks. Can't fight the message? Smear the person delivering the message.

"I nominate L. Ron Hubbard. Oh, you can't receive the award posthumously. Hmm. Well, there go those secularists again, denying the existence of people in an after-life as being real and contemperanous with life on Earth. I suppose that I'll need to solicit donations and organize my own award-giving group, recognizing what I think are extraordinary human accomplishments, but with worthies selected not limited to those who have not yet "gone to glory."

If you want to create your own "award-giving group", feel free. Of course yours won't have the backing or recognition of say, civilized society, but feel free. You can't look any more crazy than you do now.

Yes, Nobel earned his money from dynamite. So? Dynamite is a legitimate tool, used for demolition and mining. Well, it was, and it paved the way for better explosives. Because this person invented a tool that could also be used for evil, does that mean his name can't be used to represent endeavors that lead to peace? Surely you can see the fallacy in such thinking. Albert Einstein helped the government create nuclear weapons, but is his name forever smeared by your kind? No, because fission has other valuable uses. Like creating electricity, but I'm sure you knew that. I give you an E for effort though...

"You can't look any more crazy than you do now."

All the way around, DDenton, your 1:36pm post was an excellent retort to "johnson."

Good job!

Hans

The UK Press Association
intersting read.

A High Court judge in London has turned film critic, highlighting "nine scientific errors" in Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. The judge said some of the errors had arisen in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration" to support the former US vice-president's thesis on global warming.

The Government's decision to show the film in secondary schools had come under attack from father-of-two Stewart Dimmock, a Kent school governor and a member of political group The New Party, who accused the Government of "brainwashing" children with propaganda.

Justice Burton ruled at London's High Court that the film, much acclaimed by environmentalists, could be shown in schools as part of a climate change resource pack, but only if it was accompanied by new guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views.

The judge set out nine alleged errors in the film in which statements were made that were not supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus.

ERROR: Gore asserted that a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland "in the near future". The judge said: "This is distinctly alarmist and part of Gore's "wake-up call". It was common ground that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water - "but only after, and over, millennia." The judge added that "the Armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus."

ERROR: The film had also asserted that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" - but there was no evidence of any evacuation having yet happened.

ERROR: The documentary had also spoken of global warming "shutting down the Ocean Conveyor" - the process by which the Gulf Stream is carried over the North Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it was "very unlikely" that the Ocean Conveyor, also known as the Meridional Overturning Circulation, would shut down in the future, though it might slow down.

ERROR: Gore had also asserted - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said that, although there was general scientific agreement that there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts".

ERROR: Gore had asserted that the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to global warming. The judge said this had "specifically impressed" the Environment Secretary David Miliband. But the scientific consensus was that it cannot be established that the recession of snows on Mt Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change.

ERROR: The drying up of Lake Chad was used in the film as a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming, said the judge. "However, it is generally accepted that the evidence remains insufficient to establish such an attribution. "It is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability."

ERROR: Gore ascribes Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans to global warming, but there was "insufficient evidence to show that."

ERROR: Gore had also referred to a new scientific study showing that, for the first time, polar bears were being found that had actually drowned "swimming long distances - up to 60 miles - to find the ice". The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm."

That was not to say there might not in future be drowning-related deaths of bears if the trend of regression of pack ice continued - "but it plainly does not support Mr Gore's description."

ERROR: Gore said in the film that coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. Separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution was difficult.

All the malarkey about the increase in the sun's output has been dis-proven repeatedly on these threads.

Wow! That's all the proof I need! BUffalo BoB, Bani, et al

Seriously, the evidence of increased warming on other planets and satellites of those planets as presented by professional astronomers have a little more credence with me. Sorry if I don't put my faith in the experts on the DR.

What sort of consolation prize will W. and Cheney get?

"intersting read."

I suppose it is too much to ask that articles which have already been debunked, such as this latest example, not be recycled.

But since some are too lazy to read the thread:

Wow, Hans, who's to say your resource is not tainted? i guess cause you said it,,, it must be true. typical Liberal thinking, just find one of many liberal news articles to agree with them and.. there right.

The film is a pack of lies and twisted facts, no more no less, just the liberal media and your low IQ seem to take it as fact. too bad, Gore does not practice what he preaches, I hope you do, you better run and hide.. the sky is falling.

According to Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, there is no such thing as man-made climate change. He calls the whole thing "the greatest deception in the history of science." Is he right? Who knows...but what happened to the idea of open debate? This guy is treated by the media and the Left as some sort of global warming denier...a kook who thinks the Earth is still flat.

A 21-page report from something called the "Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change" has been released today...in Paris, no less...and as expected, it's predictions are dire. According to the report: "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global mean sea level." Yeah right...we've heard all this before.

But the biggest bombshell here is this one: no matter what we do, global warming will not be reversed. It will go on for centuries, according to this report. The sea levels will continue to rise as polar ice caps melt. So I guess if Al Gore wins his Nobel Peace Prize, we'll still experience global warming. So much for riding to work everyday in your hybrid car...it's not doing a thing. The situation is futile, according to this report.

But really, it makes sense that the global warming crowd would come to this conclusion. After all, global warming is a religion. The anti-capitalist enviro-nazis don't ever want the problem to be solved. After all, if global warming were to be solved tomorrow, what would they blame the United States for? They'd have to find some other reason.

Sorry .. I'm still a skeptic.
just a few of the reasons why I'm not buying this man-made global warming scare:
* The United Nations is anti-American and anti-Capitalist. In short .. I don't trust them. Not a bit. The UN would eagerly engage in any enterprise that would weaken capitalist economies around the world.
* Because after the fall of the Soviet Union and worldwide Communism many in the anti-capitalist movement moved to the environmental movement to continue pursuing their anti-free enterprise goals. Many of the loudest proponents of man-made global warming today are confirmed anti-capitalists.
* Because the sun is warmer .. and all of these scientists don't seem to be willing to credit a warmer sun with any of the blame for global warming.
* The polar ice caps on Mars are melting. How did our CO2 emissions get all the way to Mars?
* It was warmer in the 1930s across the globe than it is right now.
* It wasn't all that long ago that these very same scientists were warning us about "global cooling" and another approaching ice age?
* How much has the earth warmed up in the last 100 years? One degree. Now that's frightening.
* Because that famous "hockey stick" graph that purports to show a sudden warming of the earth in the last few decades is a fraud. It ignored previous warming periods ... left them off the graph altogether.

* The infamous Kyoto accords exempt some of the world's biggest CO2 polluters, including China and India.
* The Kyoto accords can easily be seen as nothing less than an attempt to hamstring the world's dominant capitalist economies.
* Because many of these scientists who are sounding the global warming scare depend on grant money for their livelihood, and they know the grant money dries up when they stop preaching the global warming sermon.
* Because global warming "activists" and scientists seek to punish those who have different viewpoints. If you are sure of your science you have no need to shout down or seek to punish those who disagree.
* What happened to the Medieval Warm Period? In 1996 the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a chart showing climatic change over a period of 1000 years. This graph showed a Medieval warming period in which global temperatures were higher than they are today. In 2001 the IPCC issued another 1000 year graph in which the Medieval warming period was missing. Why?
* Why has one scientist promoting the cause of man-made global warming been quoted as saying "we have to get rid of the medieval warming period?"
* Why is the ice cap on the Antarctic getting thicker if the earth is getting warmer?
* In the United State, the one country with the most accurate temperature measuring and reporting records, temperatures have risen by 0.3 degrees centigrade over the past 100 years. The UN estimate is twice that.
* There are about 160,000 glaciers around the world. Most have never been visited or measured by man. The great majority of these glaciers are growing, not melting.
* Side-looking radar interferometry shows that the ise mass in the West Antarctic is growing at a rate of over 26 gigatons a year. This reverses a melting trend that had persisted for the previous 6,000 years.

* Rising sea levels? The sea levels have been rising since the last ice age ended. That was 12,000 years ago. Estimates are that in that time the sea level has risen by over 300 feet. The rise in our sea levels has been going on long before man started creating anything but natural CO2 emissions.
* Like Antarctica, the interior of Greenland is gaining ice mass.
* Over the past 3,000 years there have been five different extended periods when the earth was measurably warmer than it is today.
* During the last 20 years -- a period of the highest carbon dioxide levels -- global temperatures have actually decreased. That's right ... decreased.
* Why did a reporter from National Public Radio refuse to interview David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma studying global warming, after his testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee unless Deming would state that global warming was being caused by man?
* Why are global warming proponents insisting that the matter is settled and that no further scientific research is needed? Why are they afraid of additional information?
* On July 24, 1974 Time Magazine published an article entitled "Another Ice Age?" Here's the first paragraph:

"As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age."

There's much more where that came from. Just know that many of the strongest proponents of this "man-made" global warming stuff are dedicated opponents to capitalism and don't feel all that warm and fuzzy about the United States.

""Just know that many of the strongest proponents of this "man-made" global warming stuff are dedicated opponents to capitalism""

Like who????

"If Gore wins the "Peace" prize, then you know the fix-is-in ... because what does Global Warming have to do with "Peace"?

It is just ludicrous that he was even nominated; along with Limbaugh! Of course, Limbaugh's nomination was to emphasize what a joke any Nobel Prize happens to be; outside of science.

Posted by tadowe"

Whatever.

Like the War on Terror has anything to do with Iraq?

Like an American has any right arguing about semantics.

Congratulations, Mr. Gore and the Council on Climate Change he shares it with. If their work even helps slow climate change then it will deliver some peace to all those who would be caught in wars over water, food and disappearing land.

Danni, .. are you really that stupid.. I bet you watch tv and swear its true.

"He said he would donate his share of the $1.5 million that accompanies the prize to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a bipartisan non-profit organization ...."

How convenient. Gore is the founder and chairman of this front group. So Gore is giving the money to himself.

Kinda like the way he buys 'carbon offsets' from himself to justify the private jet and his grotesque mansion, that sucks up the energy of a small city.

And you clowns kiss the shoes of this fraud.

"and you clowns kiss the shoes of this fraud"
im sure Danni's lips smell like old shoes.. lol

The thread contributors seem content to discuss global warming and whether Gore is a giant douche. I hoped to find a thread where people discuss the prospect that others, such as Martti Ahtisaari, deserve the prize more.

This isn't the place for me. I've been posting less and now I think its best to move on. Some of you have intrigued and challenged me over the years. Thanks for that.

And you clowns kiss the shoes of this fraud.

Yeah right... Bush-ling the fantasy lover you support isn't a fraud? This administration is more rife with fraud than Nixon's and that's saying alot. Anyway I doubt your boy will ever recieve any such honor even in ruputzicon revisionist histroy. He such a fuck up most of his party is sickened.

"And you clowns kiss the shoes of this fraud.

Posted by vernon"

I would rather kiss the shoes of a fraud then the ass of a moron crowned prezident.

In Gore's initial statement ....

"The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and spiritual challenge to all of humanity. It is also our greatest opportunity to lift global consciousness to a higher level."

So, it's not about science at all. Just Algore trying to become the high priest of his own religion.

TadOwe

Rush Limbaugh was NOT 'nominated' for a Nobel Prize. Only the Nobel Committee nominates.

This administration is more rife with fraud than ....

Posted by bushskank at 2007-10-12 02:54 PM | Reply

You cannot defend Algore on his own merits, so you have to change the subject to Bush? And you have to make up lies in the process.

The best you can say about Algore is that he's less of a fraud than someone else, and therefore, you will bow down and worship him.

I would rather kiss the shoes of a fraud then the ass of a moron crowned prezident.

Posted by Generico at 2007-10-12 02:55 PM | Reply

Good for you! You kneel to a fraud and know it.

I would do neither.

For those unfamiliar, Patrick J. Michaels is a Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies at the Cato Institute, and a research professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia. On Friday, he had an op-ed published at National Review Online that discredited much of the hysterical nonsense depicted in Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" (emphasis mine throughout):

For those unfamiliar with Patrick J. Michaels:

Patrick J. Michaels, one of the global warming skeptics most often interviewed by news media, withdrew as an expert witness in a high-profile Vermont court case rather than disclose his funding sources, court documents show.

Moreover, Michaels told the court in July 2007, some funders gave him money on the condition that their identities remain secret -- and he is largely dependent for his livelihood on the money they give him.

Michaels' web publication, World Climate Report, and its skeptical predecessors have been heavily funded by coal and electric utility industries with a large financial stake in preventing regulation of greenhouse emissions. In the 1990s, he published World Climate Review without clearly disclosing in the publication itself that it was funded by the Western Fuels Association -- until after journalist Bud Ward brought this to light in the Environment Writer newsletter.

World Climate Report gives no indication on its Web site of who funds or publishes it. Michaels is listed as its chief editor.

"All the malarkey about the increase in the sun's output has been dis-proven repeatedly on these threads."

Wow! That's all the proof I need! BUffalo BoB, Bani, et al

Seriously, the evidence of increased warming on other planets and satellites of those planets as presented by professional astronomers have a little more credence with me. Sorry if I don't put my faith in the experts on the DR.

Posted by goatman

Which planets are we talking about? Please provide a link. I'm not being disingenuous, I'd really like to see the info.

Ignoring the fact that particulate CO2 and methane levels have increased almost in exact accordance with increased output from humans since the start of the industrial revolution, I might be inclined to believe that the Sun might be at fault, because it's the only source of heat. Here's a link from NASA that I think makes an interesting point.

FLASH! LATE-BREAKING NEWS!
PROGRESS IN MINDLESS ORGANISM RESEARCH!
KC101 LEARNS TO CUT-AND-PASTE FROM NEIL BOORTZ'S WEBSITE!!!!

Film at 11

"The Nobel Prize, in my opinion, loses its significance when it becomes little more than a lib circle jerk.

Posted by OohRah"

Have you considered the possibility that the Nobel committee is non-partisan but only liberals have the wherewithal to qualify?

Doc,

Christ KC, just provide a link, then people can see where you're getting your info and make a decision for themselves.

Oops, that wasn't addressed to Doc. My bad.

"Film at 11"

Certainly explains why he didn't source his "material," like I did.

Hans

"I would rather kiss the shoes of a fraud then the ass of a moron crowned prezident.

Posted by Generico at 2007-10-12 02:55 PM | Reply

Good for you! You kneel to a fraud and know it.

I would do neither.

Posted by vernon"

If you voted Republican last election then you've done both.

"""and you clowns kiss the shoes of this fraud"
im sure Danni's lips smell like old shoes.. lol""

Which means you can't name these proponents of global warming who are are dedicated opponents to capitalism just like I suspected. Instead of making stupid jokes tell us, can you or can you not name these proponents of global warming who ae dedicated opponents of capitalism????

Yes or No???

BTW if you answer yes then please supply the list.

ask a right winger for scientific peer reviewed science publications that show Gore's position is wrong. You know what they do, either shut up or change the subject. all the science points to one scenario, none support the righties position. is it too hard to get peer reviewed research showing Gore is wrong. are they any vaild studies, Righties won't put up and they won't shup up.

It's been an interesting week or so. I thought nothing could provoke the neoright to exceed themselves in expressions of hate than the concept of "phoney soldiers". Then that Frost kid came around.

But all has been surpassed by the spleen vented on Al Gore because he won the Nobel Peace Prize.

To make sure Al gets no credit at all, the neoright is burning bandwith today explaining how all Nobel Peace Prizes are crap.

Once again, I'm not kidding. Wish I were.

For doing WHAT??

Gore and Arafat.....two good reasons to ignore the importance of this prize! Hillary's socialized medical plan to ruin this country will be the next winner!!!

Posted by wifenothome



true!

"If Gore wins the "Peace" prize, then you know the fix-is-in ... because what does Global Warming have to do with "Peace"?"

I agree 100% with Tad.

Tad - No need to tell me to fuck off and that I can't be your friend. I know. I like it that way. I'm only acknowledging that I'm aware of the meaning of "peace".

Sorry goatman, presently there are zero sunspots.

So I guess when the sun goes down there is no heat either.

As you would say, Zat:

Brilliant

The data show the 11-year cycle and an average that hardly correlates with the temperature record.

Ever hear of the "big picture", Zat? Look more than 11 years back on the chart. Sunspots have been on the average increasing for 400 years.

But, yes, it is sheer folly to think the sun might have something to do with global warming. The flame in my gas oven has nothing to do with it getting hot enough to bake bread, either. It's because I keep the door on it closed.

Moremusicnow says, "[...}"

Yeah, everyone here believes you voted for Bush. Uh-huh, sure they do ...

Posted by tadowe at 2007-10-12 06:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why would someone lie about that?

He admits he made a mistake by voting for the most damaging administration in the history of the US and you think someone would want to make that up?

So, a judge in Great Britain deemed that Gore's film was too politicized and contained too many blatant factual inaccuracies to be deemed appropriate as a teaching tool in their school system. Yet, he wins the 'Peace Prize' based predominantly on this film?


Too bad Arafat is dead. That would have made a great photo op - Gore and Yasir posing together with their Nobel Peace Prizes.

Posted by JeffJ at 2007-10-12 08:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

What is political about pointing out changing weather patterns?


I read the Brit judges responses and they were all along the lines of "conjecture". He's a judge, not a scientist and the stuff he rebuked was laughable given that most of the scientist who don't receive funding from the oil companies are saying the same thing.

Congratulations Al!

Let me get this right -
1) Gore makes a film that is trashed by the liberal NY Times for its inaccuracies and a British judge found so many errors that a disclaimer had to be attached to it.
2) Gore's home uses 20 times the electricity of an average American household.
3) He flies all over the country constantly using his uppercrust gas guzzling private jet instead of commercial which is the closest to mass transportation in the air AND each NY to LA private jet trip probably burns more fossil fuel than a Hummer driver burns all YEAR...

and Gore gets the Noblel Prize? It's absurd and along with Arafat winning the same award just reduced the prestige of the Nobel Prize. Outside of the hard scienes, the Nobel Prize really doesn't mean anything now.

It doesn't mean anything to you, because it goes to people you dislike.

As I noted earlier, that's a fixture of neocon thought. If it can't be achieved by a neocon, it must be worthless. If it's not the child of a neocon, he must be worthless. If they're not neocon soldiers, they must be worthless.

God, what drivel.

Zed
If memory serves, Kissinger and his Vietcong counterpart won the Nobel Peace Prize. That's when I decided that the prize was a worthless piece of shit. Gads, Gore and his hysterics are a fraud, and you defend him?

Well, Ray----If the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove landed on Gore's head the neoright would still smear it, just because. That's my first point.

But I learned of global warming in 1965. So the concept seems less than hysteric to me. All that melted water is going someplace.

Zed
They probably would. But that's besides the point. As I understand the process, it can be manipulated with heavy lobbying. Michael Savage gave the background behind the female that won with him. It wasn't pretty.
If John Paul had gotten the Prize, I wouldn't have complained. With Gore (and others), the committee showed its shallowness.

John Paul II would have been an excellent choice.

Fantastic, Gore supporters want to use "the prize" to catapult him into contention for the Presidency. Wow! Now, we not only follow European guidance in making legal decisions (thanks SCOTUS), but we have delegated to the Nobel Committee the task of selecting presidential nominees.

Oh, how the mighty have abdicated. Is there any resentment engendered by the suggestion that the choices of a committee of leftist foreigners should be so influential on the domestic United States political scene?

"...so influential on the domestic United States political scene" say JOHNSON

now that takes the cake as being really stupid, but right wing logic is always illogical, that's why they are ________________

So Al is up there with Arafat and such.

And how does this figure to be Peace worthy?

It's all kind of "phoney".

Phoney Awards for phony people who don't even believe enough to walk the walk.

They are on a scam to make other people pay for carbon credits for bullshit.

He is on a phoney. Like how does global warming have to do anything with Peace?

Too funny....

Murphy

Didn't reagan get a nobel?

Reagan Was definetly a man of peace, Not a shot fired and only with strength and Bravado..Normally cowards back down when challenged which is why they should just call the democratic party the "coward" party..By the way lefties, way to piss off the Homos but not including Trannies in your "equal rights" bill..What a party of freaks and social misfits

Man of peace? BWAHAHAHAHA!

Yeah, reagan never fired a shot at anyone...personally anyway.

Thanks for star wars, mr. raygun. And When is the alien invasion coming to bring humanity together? Ask your astologist.

I wondered who would pull up that website thinking reagan won if i asked.(OK, I'm a bastard) Same website another righty directed me to some time ago.

the Sentry Over America Noble Peace Prize Committee awards the year 2002 prize to

Ronald Wilson Reagan



Next time read what you link, murphy.

Oh that's cleverl The Noble not the Nobel Peace Prize!!

How absolutely sorry is that!

Sorry about that--going too fast--

I stand corrected...

He sure deserved it though.


Murphy

Funny that the website thought reagan deserved to win the real nobel in 85. The actual winners being 1985 - "International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War".

Sweet sweet irony.

Props for admitting a mistake, murphy. Mega props...people here are so incapable of error it seems.

What does "Props" mean?


Murphy

proper recognition, Murphy.

"
He sure deserved it though.
"

Right up there with an Oscar for "Bedtime for Bonzo."

Props = Respect. Short for "proper" as in "proper respect" or "proper recognition". It's an urban thang.

Al Gore uses a private jet for lectures, therefore he's a hypocrite and can't be taken seriously. Now if you'll excuse me, Bush is flying in on Air Force One from Crawford to give another scripted-audience-talk about Freedom.

--The deflecting, projecting Right--

It doesn't mean anything to you, because it goes to people you dislike.

Likewise, Zed, it means everything to you because it goes to someone you like.

Yes--Reagan did receive the Peace Prize--but for his contribution to ending the Cold War. That was promoting Peace.

Myths die hard. He happened to be president when the Soviet collapsed out of shear bankruptcy. By Murphy's criteria, Yeltsin was more deserving.

Now Gore is angling for a Grammy.

Unlikely to win after Tipper's war with the music industry in the '80s. They didn't forget, I'm sure.

"Reagan Was definetly a man of peace, Not a shot fired and only with strength and Bravado...

Oops:

A former defense secretary for Ronald Reagan says he implored the president to put Marines serving in Beirut in a safer position before terrorists attacked them in 1983, killing 241 servicemen..."They had no mission but to sit at the airport, which is just like sitting in a bull's-eye," Weinberger said. "I begged the president at least to pull them back and put them back on their transports as a more defensible position."

Did Ronald Reagan "cut and run" in 1983 after 241 American servicemen died in Beirut in the suicide bombing of the Marine barracks? Some would say that it wasn't the fact that Reagan pulled the American troops out of Lebanon that was the mistake; the real mistake was the fact that those Americans were put into an untenable position in the first place.Hans

The word on the street is that Gore has no chance for a grammy. MC Rove is the clear favorite.

"magnetic filed(sic) lessens"

"higher levels of CO2 in the past"

Indeed.

By the way, illiterate one, the Earth's atmospheric CO2 is higher than in the past 650,000 years. The big jump began with the Industrial Revolution; All due to human activity. Happy extinction, morons like you deserve it.

"Perhaps this has an effect to:"

An effect to what?

Please finish the 6th grade and get back to us.

By the way, illiterate one,

Posted by Zatoichi at 2007-10-13 09:33 AM |

Not everyone can get an MA in physics.

It has alot to do with global warming because as millions of people are displaced over the coming decades, stress will be put onto areas where they move to, and this is a direct cause of conflict in the world.

By the way, illiterate one, the Earth's atmospheric CO2 is higher than in the past 650,000 years. The big jump began with the Industrial Revolution; All due to human activity. Happy extinction, morons like you deserve it.

Posted by Zatoichi at 2007-10-13 09:33 AM

Fucking liar. Data please?

Sorry. "It changed the hottest" is what I meant to type.

Nobel is an ancroynm for " NO BELIEVE IT"

Gore is a liar, but I wil give him this he's the best con-artist in the last decade. Global warming what a joke. How about a worthy cause like Global Hunger. Naw Gore might have to really do something then Like use his heart.