Lab Equipment Blog

Your post is very good, myself have been involved in that type of discussions, though my knowledge is weak on the topic of the topic of global warming, yet these discussions I like to avoid but cannot due that the contents or contexts turns into political rhetoric for stumping for an candidate with a passion.

With this site being basically an engineering forum, any pro or against involvement adds to the problem.

And like the other prizes that can occur years after the discover. One would think that it is prudent that the Peace Prize can also be done that way also.

And in the case of the Nobel Peace Prize, there can be a difference between being proactive and common sense.

I see your point, but I found this a worthy discussion based on the history of great scientists, researchers, and doctors associated with the award. When I was growing up, the mere mention of the Nobel Prize instilled an instant reaction to the associated name. You thought of a person with superior intellect, an accomplished member of the scientific community, and you revered them based upon this association. I simply can not see what makes Gore a recipient worthy of such reverence.

Yes, politics may be entwined in this topic, but such was the case of our morality discussion, and I felt it was analyzed appropriately and continues to be a successful discourse.

The previous other blogs were distracted by basically straying from the point of the valued prize. I believed this is what you mean't I agree.

but the comment;

"and I felt it was analyzed appropriately and continues to be a successful discourse."

"Successful Discourse" what do you mean by that. kinda sounds like and oxymoron.

I think the very nature of a blog will tend to allow the conversation from time to time, but I feel the previous posts provided ample instances of good valuable points. We shall see what direction this heads in, but I trust it will be interesting nonetheless. And if it gets people to think about the topic simply by reading the articles or posts, even better.

Discourse, being a communication of thought by words.

I don't find a successful communication of thought by words to be an oxymoron.

"Discourse, being a communication of thought by words.

I don't find a successful communication of thought by words to be an oxymoron."

thats why i asked, on a forum its can be hard to read as to how it was intended presentation by the author. such as literally, or humorous or lite foder for discussion.

and your comment;

"We shall see what direction this heads in, but I trust it will be interesting nonetheless. And if it gets people to think about the topic simply by reading the articles or posts, even better."

What I have seen and its very difficult to avoid with out walking away is that some members who are very passionate about their views have a hard time with open discussion, and tends to go on personal attacks thus instead members partipate to the discussion and of getting into the mud, instead would rather watch the battle.

Thats my opinion, because given the opportunity I would do the same.

Everyone on this forum, including the initiator keeps talking about how Nobel prizes should go to great Scientists. Science prizes do. The PEACE Prize is not for science. It seems everyone is confused about this. As for comparing "An inconvenient Truth" to "Supersize Me," it is true that both raised awareness, but it is the subject that counts. We are talking about PEACE here, people. Global warming is an issue that threatens peace because when we do not have enoguh food to go around and people are being flooded out of their homes peace everywhere will be threatened. Also, Al Gore has done a lot more for the movement than just make a movie. Do your homeowrk, people.

Actually, we understand quite well the difference between the scientific categories and the peace categories. A list was provided of both, one being past winners and the other being other nominees for the Peace Prize.

The Super Size Me comment was tongue in cheek.

As for the tremendous leap made from global warming to food shortages and on to complete and utter chaos... Well, that is just a stretch to try and consider Gore's work as a beacon of peace. Global Warming awareness simply pales in comparison to what the Irena Sendler's, Martti Ahtisaari's, and Lida Yusupova's of the world have done for the peace movement.

"Actually, we understand quite well the difference between the scientific categories and the peace categories. A list was provided of both, one being past winners and the other being other nominees for the Peace Prize."

substance as to probability?? tongue in cheek

"The Super Size Me comment was tongue in cheek."

one has to be careful about that, should use an emoticon or something. I read it other than your intend also.

"Global Warming awareness simply pales in comparison to what the Irena Sendler's, Martti Ahtisaari's, and Lida Yusupova's of the world have done for the peace movement."

You are indeed accurate in the above point and to assume that making the public aware of what could POTENTIALLY be a problem (and what humankind can POTENTIALLY do to assist in reducing it) and then comparing that to the accomplishments of the others is absolutely absurd.

your comment;

"and then comparing that to the accomplishments of the others is absolutely absurd."

For clarity are you saying awareness as no merit or how dare you question his merit?

I see you signature, lets see.... I pick no. 14). that has yet to be determined.

I agree to the full with Guest's posting. For the same reason it escapes me on what grounds would Irena Sandler or Irina Yusupova deserve the Prize.

"Yes, politics may be entwined in this topic, but such was the case of our morality discussion, and I felt it was analyzed appropriately and continues to be a successful discourse."

The original question itself is politcally biased. Many people don't like Gore. I have no opinion of him per se. However, pride is no substitute for wisdom. And the tit for tat mentality of counting snowflakes in Boise is just further avoidance of the larger data that needs addressing.

The thing is about whether one likes Gore or not. Some people may not agree on his work being recognized. but it tend to cross over to despising Gore as a person.

Example I have;

I don't believe some of the issue's Gore Stands for, not necessarily global warming, yet other things I respected him for, say such as his service to this country, such as his time serving in Vietnam. I don't think some people can separate this, they need strict yes and no or for and against answers.

Yes phoenix -- you are correct "The thing is about whether one likes Gore or not".

Personally I have a dislike for Al Gore, I don't think I can say that he does or does not deserve this recognition because my opinion of, particularly, the way he presents himself. For instance (my opinion only) his seemingly pretentious smile and what appears to be a highly rehearsed degree of sincerity when he speaks on an issue.

I cannot fairly evaluate whether he deserves this because I have a poor view of him as a pretentious and insincere person.

I cannot even tolerate listening to him on the TV. Because of my feelings about him thus I have little to no interest in his accomplisments public or private.

That is a very honest response, which I share with you also, the way that Gore carries himself. Must be a first impression thing or a gut feeling and holding back with out being bias is difficult. as well some of the hypocrisy like "do as I say, not as I do".

Though I do have respect for people that when called upon to serve thier country, and performs whether they agree or not. I try to give them the benefit of the doubt on that premise that is off the topic.

I do not know why this subject is tamer, simuliar subject about this gets pretty rough. maybe because it is seemingly majority responce is one sided.

I believe many writing on these blogs do not know the difference between the Nobel Peace Prize and the other Nobel Prizes.

The Nobel Prizes given in the fields of Physics, Chemistry, etc are given to people who have made remarkable contributions to their fields. Al Gore's contribution was in helping bring awareness to a cause, therefore he was not competing for an award in the science areas the Nobel Prize includes, but in the Peace Prize area.

Nelson Mandela (trouble maker who has made his country worse), Yaser Arafat (former Arab terrorist who is now dead) and Kofi Onan (former UN General Secretary and the father of a thief who was convicted for stealing UN $ and funds and I am sure he knew about his son's whereabouts) all were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize- the same category as Al Gore and all of them are less qualified and have done less for a good human cause than Al Gore. So how come you are not complaining about them getting the Nobel Prize?. Is it because Al Gore is an American, a liberal or both?.

Al Gore has worked on bringing awareness about Global Warming for almost 30 years, way before he became Vice-president of the United States during the Clinton years.

The amount of uninformed people here is huge. Do your homework before posting please. Thank you.

I believe many writing on these blogs do not know the difference between the Nobel Peace Prize and the other Nobel Prizes.

The Nobel Prizes given in the fields of Physics, Chemistry, etc are given to people who have made remarkable contributions to their fields. Al Gore's contribution was in helping bring awareness to a cause, therefore he was not competing for an award in the science areas the Nobel Prize includes, but in the Peace Prize area.

Nelson Mandela (trouble maker who has made his country worse), Yaser Arafat (former Arab terrorist who is now dead) and Kofi Onan (former UN General Secretary and the father of a thief who was convicted for stealing UN $ and funds and I am sure he knew about his son's whereabouts) all were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize- the same category as Al Gore and all of them are less qualified and have done less for a good human cause than Al Gore. So how come you are not complaining about them getting the Nobel Prize?. Is it because Al Gore is an American, a liberal or both?.

Al Gore has worked on bringing awareness about Global Warming for almost 30 years, way before he became Vice-president of the United States during the Clinton years.

The amount of uninformed people here is huge. Do your homework before posting please. Thank you.

I believe many writing on these blogs do not know the difference between the Nobel Peace Prize and the other Nobel Prizes.

The Nobel Prizes given in the fields of Physics, Chemistry, etc are given to people who have made remarkable contributions to their fields. Al Gore's contribution was in helping bring awareness to a cause, therefore he was not competing for an award in the science areas the Nobel Prize includes, but in the Peace Prize area.

Nelson Mandela (trouble maker who has made his country worse), Yaser Arafat (former Arab terrorist who is now dead) and Kofi Onan (former UN General Secretary and the father of a thief who was convicted for stealing UN $ and funds and I am sure he knew about his son's whereabouts) all were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize- the same category as Al Gore and all of them are less qualified and have done less for a good human cause than Al Gore. So how come you are not complaining about them getting the Nobel Prize?. Is it because Al Gore is an American, a liberal or both?.

Al Gore has worked on bringing awareness about Global Warming for almost 30 years, way before he became Vice-president of the United States during the Clinton years.

The amount of uninformed people here is huge. Do your homework before posting please. Thank you.

I believe many writing on these blogs do not know the difference between the Nobel Peace Prize and the other Nobel Prizes.

The Nobel Prizes given in the fields of Physics, Chemistry, etc are given to people who have made remarkable contributions to their fields. Al Gore's contribution was in helping bring awareness to a cause, therefore he was not competing for an award in the science areas the Nobel Prize includes, but in the Peace Prize area.

Nelson Mandela (trouble maker who has made his country worse), Yaser Arafat (former Arab terrorist who is now dead) and Kofi Onan (former UN General Secretary and the father of a thief who was convicted for stealing UN $ and funds and I am sure he knew about his son's whereabouts) all were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize- the same category as Al Gore and all of them are less qualified and have done less for a good human cause than Al Gore. So how come you are not complaining about them getting the Nobel Prize?. Is it because Al Gore is an American, a liberal or both?.

Al Gore has worked on bringing awareness about Global Warming for almost 30 years, way before he became Vice-president of the United States during the Clinton years.

The amount of uninformed people here is huge. Do your homework before posting please. Thank you.

"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change" Photo: Scanpix/Tom Hevezi Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize Geneva, Switzerland USA Founded in 1988 b. 1948

not even a whole medal he has to share the other half with a swiss based panel that obviously did the work and and he did what he does best talking head, good memory or script and there you go half a medal.

Well, that is the point, when a spokesperson can get a medal for that, How many spokespersons were on the list for colon cancer, breast cancer ........?

The work of the team involved with "An Inconvenient Truth" represents a big effort about what may easily be one of HUMANITY biggest problems of today (and near future). And is all about PEACE and LIFE (survival?).

So, at least in my view, the effort to make people think that they can't just ignore the serious degradation of the planet is of great relevance. So I see this Nobel Prize as not only well deserved but also timely, as it can help in raising people awareness about the need of confronting planet problems NOW. And this gives the Nobel Prize a meaning beyond Science and Academy. Be it or not an "Inconvenient Prize" for some.

The long and ellaborated posting that initiates this topic is full of out of place comparisons with scientific achievements and other derogating statements, even humurous ones (!), but lacks, in my opinion, the pernitent insigth into the relevance of the social achievement the awarded prize is about.

Here Here!

when I was in grade school, polution of the great lakes was a huge concern, today clean up has and is happening the concern is still there but it is not at the top of the list as global warming. In 40 years just like polution, global warming may take a back seat to another more serious issue for what ever reason.

Al Gore should win the WAR prize for committing acts of war on the world according to his own touted beliefs.

One (just one of many) of the houses he owns produces 20 times the energy load of the average AMERICAN home, and he is rarely there, being on his private jet flying from one useless publicity stunt to another.

This sounds like an act of WAR against yourself, not a PEACE prize, let alone a Noble one.

BTW The earth is in constant cycle and the scientific scare society is also. In the 70's the imminent ICE AGE was very much greatly feared in many publications and forums.

So which is it, buy sunscreen due to Global Warming (oh, I forgot all about the hole in the ozone which is larger than the earth by now) or parka's?

BTW Truth is always consistent and lies never are.

cannot help putting a label on it, but a term of hypocrisy comes to mind.

You said it first, but I agree totally!!!

All thats gold does not glitter ....
http://www.edhifoundation.com/edhi-foundation-biography.asp

<All thats gold does not glitter>

It's 'glisten', not 'glitter'. D'oh!

Truth is always the first victim !!!

but it does prevail.

Good, thought provoking commentary from all!

I agree with Grusbf5 -- what Al Gore did was noteworthy but not deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize. Martti Ahtisaari or Lida Yusupova appear to be much more worthy of the honor as they have been directly involved in conflict resolution.

There is a precedence, however, in this. Mother Theresa was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1979 "for work undertaken in the struggle to overcome poverty and distress, which also constitute a threat to peace." (Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa) One of the posting to this discussion points out that raising awareness about global warming has a similar result. Not having enough is the cause of war, global warming reduces resources available to sustain life; therefore conflict arises. (Side note: in Sanskrit, the word for "war" literally means "desire for more cows", reference: Newton's Telecom Dictionary, 16th Edition, page 982)

In fact, a review of all Nobel Peace Prizes (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/index.html) shows that there have been several awards for efforts not directly related to war and peace, but to economic development, reduction in poverty, etc.

So it isn't too far fetched to award this prize to the IPCC and Al Gore.

I think most of the reaction to Al Gore is his status in the effort as a "talking head." I agree with that assessment. The real work was done by the committee.

There is a reason the peace prize is not handed out with the other prizes (not even same location). I am not exactly sure how raising the awareness about global warming is worthy of the peace prize. Did this awareness avert some major war(s) or genocide? Some of the winners of the peace prize in modern history would have Nobel enraged, were he not dead. He was a strong proponent of the speak softly/big stick kind of peace (and actually Teddy Roosevelt was one of the first winners). The peace prize has always been a kind of joke, more about a swedish political statement. But, now they don't even award it for anything relaing to the promotion of world peace, just award it to anyone whom they want to show support for their political views. the peace prize has become swedish method of influencing various nations politics toward their own political agenda, without the actual direct tie to Sweden. This is equivalent to giving the pulitzer to George Bush, based on his press releases.

I find that some of his releases are very humorist and entertaining......is there a nobel prize for that.....literature maybe?

I'll second that

From my point of view, Gore is really more of a spokesman, an icon, to focus attention on a critically important area: Global Warming, for example. Bear in mind, this guy was some hanky-panky chad maneuvering with FL ballots away from the presidency, and he obviously has friends in high places. To answer your question: No. I don't believe Gore's name belongs with the great names in Science, economics, etc. It's like giving the Pope a peace award. His name and award is there to focus people's attention on a specific problem. Can Gore come up with any scientific programs to "solve" Global Warming? Of course not!

are you saying that all what is actually needed is a large billboard of Al Gore with the phase "Just say NO..........to global warming".

Don't know if we can keep Al to hold a pose for long enough, he is kinda jumpy....

oops, might have went too far.

Global Warming needs YOU!

Just say NO..........to global warming

LOL,

Clever and imaginative.....well atleast clever......well ok maybe just eye catching.

I nominate guest, sometimes known as the unknown comic, (and also known for other things that I can't say for the fear of being censored) for the nobel peace prize.

are there any trademark issues on this or something?

Al Who? Oh him a failed idiot talking nonsense. Global what? Oh that rubbish again.

According to me the Noble Peace Prize Should have gone to those who are fighting the war against terrorism for the last 8 years instead of work done by Al Gore about Environment to which I am absolutely unaware and the benefits thereof? Either it should go to USA or to Pakistan, who are the pioneers of this war and saving millions of lives from the horror of Terror, without having it defined appropriately at any international forum like UNO.

"According to me the Noble Peace Prize Should have gone to those who are fighting the war against terrorism for the last 8 years instead of work done by Al Gore about Environment to which I am absolutely unaware and the benefits thereof? Either it should go to USA or to Pakistan, who are the pioneers of this war and saving millions of lives from the horror of Terror, without having it defined appropriately at any international forum like UNO. "

That would be harder to defend than Al Gores Nomination, but is worth consideration.

Which would bring controversy with this;

Nobel Peace Prize - What Has Happened to This Once Great Honor?

cross out Al Gore and now it becomes the U.S. or Pakistan.

What will happen is this subject is going to get questioned and over analyzed until its unrecognized, or the value of it is finally lost.

maybe, the prized instead of awarding prizes such as the Nobel Prize prize for such grandiose controversal topics as global warming spokespersons, or warring factions. bring it down a notch, and award it to people who have made personal and self sacrifices, for humanity. When it is more defined.

Probably that would still bring in controversy, but atlease it can be more easily defended.

phoenix911

Thank you for acknowledging my comments on NOBLE PEACE PRIZE.I salute all those who were sacrificed in this bloodiest war, but we need to understand why it is happening--- i.e. killing of innocent people?

I just recalled something about Al Gore,

When Oliver North was being investagating by the white house on the Iran-Contra affair during the Reagan Administration, He try to warn the commitee of an unknown man by the name of Osama bin Ladin,

Al Gores jokingly and sarcastical reply to Oliver North was; Osama bin who.

My benefit of doubt for Al Gore is used up.

Being proactive by bringing awareness to of all things, global warming, those of who think that Al's a great man, explain that, it occurred to me when I responded to a post about the war in Iraq and Afganistan on this post, I posted it off topic but it was'nt, trying to make a connection why he brought that up is when it occured to me.

The other post that stated he should get the Prize for war, I do not believe he knew how correct he was.

If Al Gore was a truly a man of integrity he should relinquish his prize. And restore the Nobel Peace prize to an respected one.

On a correction of which was not sure of was that Gores response was not to Oliver North.

My views still stand.

I do not know what you mean by;

"This bluntness is "Gore Warning", which has no any relation to the Global Warming."

The topic of this subject being the merits of how this award has been bestowed.

But if I understand you correct, Fear tactics has been used in the past for swaying public opinion for political advantage, and the Nobel committee is no more than just a tool for this. (in my opinion, a tool who's value is diminishing)

It does make one think for what?