If global warming isn't even proven by science, why did Al Gore get the Nobel Peace Prize for his 'work'...?

Question

If global warming isn't even proven by science, why did Al Gore get the Nobel Peace Prize for his 'work' on global warming?

Answer 1

I'm not sure what you mean by "proven by science," it's clearly been shown that it has a very high likelihood of being real and getting worse, as evidenced by hundreds of papers.  He won the Peace Prize because the committee thought that the work he had done publicizing what may turn it to be one of the most important issues of the 21st century was of high value.

Maybe it's only proven at the 95% confidence level, but that's too big a number to ignore.

I'm curious, could you give us (or just me, through email )more details of your work on global climatology). I have yet to meet a climate scientist that did not believe in AGW, so I'm curious as to what your research is.  Thanks.

Answer 2

Then why is it that these organizations support the theory? And if you were a climate scientist, as you claim, you wouldn't have to ask. Also, as a scientist, you of all people should understand that we can't prove anything absolutely. Which makes me wonder about you???

http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_...

http://www.geosociety.org/positions/posi...

http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.a...

http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/positi...

http://www.aip.org/gov/policy12.html

http://downloads.climatescience.gov/sap/...

Answer 3

Gore's book is probably the best science fiction novel ever.

Thats the award he justly deserves.

Answer 4

He probably paid them to get it.

Answer 5

The Nobel isn't the last word in anything.  All you need there is like-minded people doing the judging.  In fact, I hear I'm going to be nominated next time because of my witty answers in Y!A.  And if you're a global climatologist you mustn't be a very good one because even I can see through the AGW garbage.

Answer 6

Because it is proven by science.  Every peer-review journal that has talked about this issue has agreed that it is a danger and that it is man-made.

The only scientists saying it isn't are the ones that work for the oil companies.

Key phrase:  peer-review journal.  Look it up.  It will disabuse you about many things you hear on the censored news channels.

Answer 7

"Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins. At the same time, intelligent design (ID) offers a promising scientific alternative to materialistic theories of biological and cosmological evolution -- an alternative that is finding increasing theoretical and empirical support."

There is more on this web site that explains how the "legitimate" organizations someone else used as back-up are coming up with their theories and forcing their contributors to change their writing if it is not in line with the organization.

I think in the coming months and years we will see more and more respected scientists speak out about the global warming scam.  The founder of The weather Channel has a very simple graph that clearly shows the correlation between our CO2 emissions and global warming.  Guess what?  There is none.  The data does not support the theory.

Answer 8

Do you have any idea how little is entirely proven in science? Almost nothing!

Global warming has great amounts of evidence to support it, enough to be able to distinguish that it is a real problem.

I love all you guys who have no clue what real science is and come on here and claim that it does not exist when it most certainly does! No one can deny that there are more CO2 emissions now than every before as a result of human output, no one can deny that this has to have an effect on our global ecosystem. And surely no one can deny that waste, logging, soil degredation and polution are real problems. But I guess you guys will keep denying it all... just to preserve your blindness.

Answer 9

Sorry to say that the Nobel Peace Prize is seldom awarded to anyone who actually is deserving of it, and seems to be totally political in nature.

Al Gore is 'laughing his way to the bank' at the moment.

He has no concern now, other than increasing his already grossly obscene bank account!

He has become the figure head for the extreme liberal movement, which only seems to be interested in destroying the  society which gives them the freedoms which we have fought so hard to achieve over the centuries!

'MONEY TALKS', nothing else seems to matter these days!

Answer 10

Unfortunately the Nobel Peace Prize is a farce.

Jimmy Carter won one. He's by far the worst president in our history and started the Iran/Iraq problem back in the 70's

I think Osama Bin Laden is up for the next one.  They prefer mass murderers.

Answer 11

A global climatologist, huh?

Perhaps then you can explain why daily minimum temperatures (i.e., nighttime) are rising twice as fast as daily maximum temperatures (i.e., daytime) -- just as greenhouse theory predicts?

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/gcag/GCAGdealte...

Perhaps then you can explain why stratospheric temperatures are cooling, and why the cooling effect is the greatest at the highest altitudes -- just as greenhouse theory predicts?

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/images...

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/hadat2...

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/temp/sterin...

Perhaps you can explain why surface temperatures are rising, just as greenhouse theory predicts?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3200/2704...

Perhaps you can explain why total solar irradiance has shown no net increase during the satellite era, other than the 11-year Wolf cycle?

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/solar...

Until you can explain ALL of these data, you have lost the scientific debate. But then, as a global climatologist, you knew that already, didn't you?

Answer 12

The Nobel Peace Prize has become just a award for having a liberal agenda, a few years ago Yassar Arafat won, a freaking terrorist. Global warming is a scam designed scare people into accepting higher taxes and more control over their lives, Gore has figured out a way to cash in on this latest disaster scare.

Answer 13

Let's keep this simple, (in deference to Mr Gore)

Consider the source.....the award was political, NOT scientific.(or even based on any good science)

Luck

Answer 14

Dumb and Dummy voted for him!

Answer 15

FYI it's just Climatologist there no such thing as a Global Climatologist

Lee J: 2000 to 31000 would be true, if only the 31000 weren't fiction

Answer 16

It's the good old boy network. I have seen awards given out just because of associates wanting to get points with a person. Sometimes there are no definite candidates, so one gets picked out just because the recepient is one of the group.Do you really think the nobel peace prize is still valid? I believe it has become a farce.

Answer 17

Because Al Gore kept on asking for a recount on the votes and they just decided to give it to him to shut him up...I guess they figured he wasn't going to let this one go

Answer 18

Well, global warming has been highly supported by many scientists for a while now--- just not the ones Washington is paying.  Besides, "proving" something in science is about as fast and easy as playing a ball-in-a-cup game without the string.

Answer 19

How do you propose man-made global warming be proven?  By that standard, evolution isn't proven either.  You can't prove a theory.  However, you can support a theory with overwhelming scientific evidence.  That is the case for evolution and for anthropogenic global warming.

Answer 20

If 2000 or so scientists, who comprise the IPCC, also comprise a consensus sufficient to end the debate, what about the 31,000+ scientists who say the whole thing is bunk?

2000 vs. 31,000 doesn't sound like a slam-dunk consensus to me.

Answer 21

How could you possibly be a scientist if you make a statement like "globall warming isn't even proven by science". You are either pretending to be dumber than you are or you don't understand science.

Answer 22

According to a committee spokesman at the time:

"The Norwegian Nobel Committee said it wanted to bring into sharper focus the "increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states" posed by climate change.

Mr Gore was praised as "probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted", through his lectures, films and books.

The choice of recipients continues a trend of the Nobel Peace Prize redefining the potential sources of conflict and threats to peace, says the BBC's world affairs correspondent Mike Wooldridge."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/704108...

So, to translate:  The committee too is in the fortune telling business now.  It no longer recognizes achievements in history so much as it tries to steer global discussion through its selections.  Al Gore et al certainly opens a lot of discussions...

Edit:  3 thumbs down for quoting the selection committee??  Some people here REALLY don't believe in sources!

Answer 23

it is not What You Know, but Who You Blow.

albore is a blow hard, no wonder he and bj clinton were so tight.

Answer 24

I think it just goes to show that even the supposed unbiased Nobel committee has an agenda and will overlook obvious flaws and misinformation given in the movie by awarding that idiot the prize.  All they did in my mind is make their organization look like a worldwide joke.  The Nobel is meaningless to me now.  If someone deserves to be recognized, let their work speak for itself.

Answer 25

Because the Nobel is a highly political prize.