Al Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize...

[mn shutterbug]

[QUOTE=walterick
Unlike you, I have not heard anyone say that we are the singular cause of global warming (though we may be.) That we affect the weather and the temperature of the earth is demonstrated here in your post. That is all. To moderate our activities is to moderate the earth's temperature, that is the point.
[/QUOTE]

This is true, from what I've read recently. We are contributing, not the only cause.

I am curious about one thing. How in the world can anyone measure what the earth's temperature was billions of years ago? I don't think it's possible, no matter how large and refined of a super computer in use.

[mwfanelli2]

I am curious about one thing. How in the world can anyone measure what the earth's temperature was billions of years ago? I don't think it's possible, no matter how large and refined of a super computer in use.

You look at cores taken from land and ice. You also look at the results gained from the surface/ocean geology (shows signs of changes) and the evidence of cultural anthropologists. Supercomputers have little or nothing to do with the experimental collection of data.

[another view]

You look at cores taken from land and ice.

One of the many things scientists do in Antarctica - great place to study this with an icecap that's about two miles thick.

I think the most important thing we can do is try to be cautious. If there are a bunch of scientists that think moderating consumption is a good idea and if not, this may happen - that's a pretty good message. Maybe every single one of them is wrong, but why tempt fate?

As for the prize itself, I'm not a big fan of it. Ghandi never won it. Our illustrious former Governor was nominated after commuting all death row inmates to life sentence (however this nominee would be found guilty of federal corruption charges in the months to come, lost his State pension and may serve a short sentence himself). It's just like yet another "top 10" list to me.

[mwfanelli2]

One of the many things scientists do in Antarctica - great place to study this with an icecap that's about two miles thick.

I think the most important thing we can do is try to be cautious. If there are a bunch of scientists that think moderating consumption is a good idea and if not, this may happen - that's a pretty good message. Maybe every single one of them is wrong, but why tempt fate?

As for the prize itself, I'm not a big fan of it. Ghandi never won it. Our illustrious former Governor was nominated after commuting all death row inmates to life sentence (however this nominee would be found guilty of federal corruption charges in the months to come, lost his State pension and may serve a short sentence himself). It's just like yet another "top 10" list to me.

Actually, Hitler and Stalin were nominated. Obviously, their nominations were rejected.

[walterick]

My understanding from an NPR piece a few years ago is that basically anyone can be nominated. There are LOST of people out there capable of nominating someone for a Nobel prize, so saying that someone was nominated is akin to saying someone was proud of their grandson. The committee apparently receives hundreds (if not thousands?) of nominations each year. It's apparently in the voting where the real discernment takes place.

[Intrepid Berkeley Explorer]

I photographed evidence of global warming without even knowing it. This was on my 1990 trip to Alaska, when Al Gore was one of few Senators concerned about the issue. Not much publicity yet. Even in Glacier Bay we were told about how the glaciers had retreated significantly over many decades. Still glacier calving (ice falling from the face) was the most desirable video. My ignorance then could be excused, but that is no longer acceptable for people on our planet.

[shutterman]

Facts and stats like these found at this link - http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/ is a big reason why people have a hard time worrying/believing about global warming. According to the "inconvienent truth" camp we should be having more and more powerful storms. These last two seasons are an easy and "proven" rebuttle to the hype - at least one facet.

[mwfanelli2]

Facts and stats like these found at this link - http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/ is a big reason why people have a hard time worrying/believing about global warming. According to the "inconvienent truth" camp we should be having more and more powerful storms. These last two seasons are an easy and "proven" rebuttle to the hype - at least one facet.

No one said it is a linear relationship. Plus, we still have an el Nino that also has a big effect on weather and ocean currents. There is no such thing as "all or nothing" in systems this complex regardless of what Gore on the left or the ultra right-wing nut-jobs on the right say.

[shutterman]

Michael, I agree. My point was that they would have you believe there IS a linear relationship either as a scare tactic or a hype method and when it doesn't work out people start to question other findings.

Thanks,
Wes