Screaming Penguin - Source Does Matter

Props to Gore. Not like that should have to be said, but I see many blogs and even news "pundits" bitching that he won the peace prize - saying that he Carter and so on have degraded the prize. Oh the 48%, but even on this?

Several of these people have called Gore's work just a recent PR campaign (one even saying he has only been doing this the last few years because it kept him in the limelight after he "lost" the presidential bid).

Gore has been championing environmental causes for many years, not just the last few. These idgits might want to read a book or two, maybe Earth in the Balance - from 1992.

And then of course there are the general climate change is not "real," or has no relation to human causes crowd. I still hear people say "there are scientists who agree with me, it's not real." You can find a made up think tank "scientist" who says just about anything. Newsflash though, the real, peer reviewed, scientific community as a whole, is not "debating" global warming.

One guy I had a conversation with recently started quoting Crichton's "State of Fear." He said it was full of "facts" that disputed global warming. I said, you mean his FICTIONAL NOVEL? He said, well yes, but he quoted many scientific facts. This is what people use to justify their approach to a problem the world has as significant as global warming? (Many in the scientific community still felt it was necessary to address this novel, and came out stating that it was full of many things that were false, taken out of context, and or were intentionally misleading - and the American Petroleum Institute awarded it a "journalism" award - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_fear).

Sure Gore just basically did a fancy power point, he's not a climate researcher, so why is his "work" any different? Neither Gore or Crichton are actual scientists, right? Well, the difference, quite simply, is REALITY. What Gore is trying to do is push past the bullshit the API and other organizations are trying to get, in many cases apparently successfully, dumbasses to believe. Don't read either Gore or Crichton though, go read the actual scientists peer reviewed journal articles - if you have any doubts.

As Maher put it, the only "scientist" that is still questioning climate change is the shell answer man.

Of course Gore hasn't done any real science, his is just an awareness and public policy campaign, but it's the PEACE prize people. What could be more appropriate? If we, as a planet, don't start dealing a lot more seriously with climate change, and many other environmental issues, then peace will be one of the first victims (peace means more than just lack of military conflict, and even if you narrow the definition to just preventing conflict, humans competing for fewer resources will lead to conflicts).

Even though I am glad to see Gore, and the IPCC, recognized, I am dismayed at the choice being "controversial." That just proves how cognitive dissonance can work into a mass delusion, and how intractable the real problem, changing public policy around the world to actually give a shit, is going to be.