A Nobel Idea
From Matthew Sheffield today, an Wall Street Journal op-ed from one of the winners of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. It seems he’s not all that keen about his tiny piece of the award because, in his professional opinion, he and his fellows on the IPCC didn’t earn it.
I’ve had a lot of fun recently with my tiny (and unofficial) slice of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). But, though I was one of thousands of IPCC participants, I don’t think I will add “0.0001 Nobel Laureate” to my resume.
The other half of the prize was awarded to former Vice President Al Gore, whose carbon footprint would stomp my neighborhood flat. But that’s another story. Large icebergs in the Weddell Sea, Antarctica. Winter sea ice around the continent set a record maximum last month.
Mr. Christy’s caution is the same that I’ve been recommending for some time here at the Shack. There is much that we don’t know and we’re very well advised to keep that in mind before we go flying into a panic. Check out the whole article. It’s an informative and enjoyable read.
No related posts.
Category: Oh the Climate, It is A-Changin'
funny how the handful of those scientist who oppose global warming theories (christy/Lomborg) seem to reference each other and not much else. to say that "One millennium there are hippos swimming in the Thames, and a geological blink later there is an ice bridge linking Asia and North America" is disengenous at best. another blink takes us to a time when the planet was uninhabitable by man do to atmospheric conditions. ask the fine man how many degrees of temperature change it would take to make our current agricultural choices fail. then ask mr. Lomborg the economic consequences of that development.
Re: "The other half of the prize was awarded to former Vice President Al Gore, whose carbon footprint would stomp my neighborhood flat. But that’s another story. "
Actually that is the story.
Conservatives are so wedded to their hate that and good item, such as the Nobel Prize, must automatically be devalued when someone they loathe receives it.
Conservatives thought the Nobel was just great when Republican Henry Kissinger received one.
But, now that Al Gore received one, the Republican hate machine revs up to full "smear" mode.
That is the one item that can be used to identify a true Conservative: His/her hate. It binds Conservatives together, as at Republican Presidential debates when they all compete to see who can hate Hillary Clinton the most.
In the end, hate is all Conservatives have left: George W. Bush having squandered everything else they used to stand for, such as Constitutional freedoms and fiscal responsiblity.
From now on, all we will hear from Conservatives is hate and venom. It is their lifeblood and reason for existance. Nothing else exists for a Conservative beyond who s/he hates and how much s/he hates.
You've got it, Steve.
Hate and bitterness that the political ideology they supported so strongly is an abject failure in practice.
Conservatism is as dead as Communism.
What indication, other than he disagrees with Al Gore's hypocrisy and alarmism, do you have that Christy is a conservative?
Knee? Jerk.
Ahhh yes, only conservatives are filled with hate. Liberals would NEVER hate anyone, except anyone who disagrees with them of course.
This guy was on the IPCC panel. He's someone who's actually "in the know." He brings up legitimate concerns, and the lefties go bonkers, as they usually do when someone doesn't buy into their groupthink.
And I love how he takes a back-handed slap at Al Gore, and that's what Philly Steve (you're giving all us other Steve's a bad name) fixates on. Here's a clue: It ain't all about Al Gore. He's part of the problem, but not all of it.
Lefties, get it through your thick skulls already that the science on this whole debacle isn't settled, no matter how much you whine and complain that it is. And you can throw around ad hominem attacks all you want, it doesn't change the facts.
Now, go back to your Kos and DU echo chambers…
"Ahhh yes, only conservatives are filled with hate. Liberals would NEVER hate anyone"
No need for sarcasm.
"Lefties, get it through your thick skulls"
Name-calling makes baby Jesus cry.
?Now, go back to your Kos and DU echo chambers…"
You can't tell me what to do. You're not my real dad.
Steve III
To extend his own metaphor, we should only take this guy 0.0001% seriously.
Re: "What indication, other than he disagrees with Al Gore’s hypocrisy and alarmism, do you have that Christy is a conservative?"
That IS the hallmark of a Conservative. Liberals can like or dislike Al Gore (or Bill and Hillary Clinton for that matter). But all Conservatives are required to HATE Al Gore, with every fiber of their being. Conservatives are also required to transfer that hate to any peson or group that has anything to do with Al Gore, which is why Conservatives must now express hate for the NobelPrizes. (to do otherwise would mean they would be drummed out of the American Enterprise Institute).
Re: "You can’t tell me what to do. You’re not my real dad."
No. That role is reserved for "The Decider".
Philly Steve – Well, I don't exactly hate the Nobel Peace Prize but I do question why it's so often been given to folks whose contribution to peace has been…negligible.
Or who have been actively working the other side in the case of Yasser Arafat.
Before we go flying into a panic? Are you insane? Forget panic. What one thing have you done? What one thing has The Bush Crime Family done? Panic? You morons.
Re: "Philly Steve – Well, I don’t exactly hate the Nobel Peace Prize but I do question why it’s so often been given to folks whose contribution to peace has been…negligible."
I repeat. I do not recall one single Conservative having even the slightes "question" when Republican Henry Kissinger received the prize. Only "Liberal" Mafrtin Luther King.
Conservatives only have "questions" when the politics don't go their way.
Or are Conservatives "questioning" since the campaign to have George W. Bush receive the Peace Prize went nowhere?
The problem is that peacemakers are considered "weak" by Conservatives who have a love for war: The more, the better. Especially among the ChickenHawk brigades such as Dick "I had better things to do" Cheney and George W. "Daddy got me into the Guard" Bush.
Liberals have, of course, used routes to avoid combat as well. Bill Clinton went in front of his draft board three times for a deferment (as opposed to Dick Cheney's five). This has engendered a "draft dodger" label from Conservatives forever (though, strangly that label has never been used by a Conservative anywhere for Dick Cheney… must just be an oversight).
Steve, you should probably find some conservatives who are younger than 80 to talk to. I don't know a single one, and that includes a couple dozen conservative bloggers, who have ever praised the Committee for giving an award to Kissinger nor condemned it for giving one to King. I serously doubt you could name more than one conservative who holds the view you say we hold.
I know plenty who condemned giving one to the mass murdering Arafat, the tyrant-supporting Carter, the corrupt Annan, the conspiratorial Maathai, or the "fake but accurate" Menchu.
And you're barking up the wrong tree around here when you play the warmonger card unless, of course, you're willing to include the last President and Vice President and the majority of the members of Congress (including most Democrats) as those with "a love for war". If yuo're not, then you're simply being a dishonest partisan and we can't really converse further.
I do admire those who minimize their carbon footprint – who aircondition their homes with windcatchers, power it with solar panels, bicycle to work, and so on. But I also admire those who persuade others to adopt some elements of that lifestyle. That quest, to persuade millions to change how they live, may be difficult without frequent travel. I think that perhaps Gore has more than made up for his carbon production by changing the culture.
"I think that perhaps Gore has more than made up for his carbon production by changing the culture."
No, he hasn't. If you're going to preach to the masses, then you need to walk the walk. I simply cannot give anyone credibility when their actions do not mirror their words, regardless the topic or which side of the aisle they're on.
Until Al Gore radically changes his lifestyle, I will continue to ignore him…
Re: "Until Al Gore radically changes his lifestyle, I will continue to ignore him…"
As far as I can tell, the Conservative position on global climate change appears to be, "We hate Al Gore, therefore Global Warming cannot be happening".
I have yet to see a single "Conservative" comment about Global Warming that does not include the obligatory declaraion of huw much Conservatives hate Al Gore.
OK.
Go ahead and keep up that good old Conservative Hate machine.
But the fact that Al Gore may be a hypocrite (aren't we all to a greater or lesser degree about most of our "positions"?) does not mean that the planet is not warming up, nor that humanity's release of massive amounts of carbon dioxode is not contributing to it, and (most importantly) that it will have substantial effects on how humanity continues to live on theplanet and a lot of those effects will be negative.