It’s Not All Praise For Gore In The Media
Several op-eds out today that take shots at both Al Gore and at the Nobel Prize committee that selected the Goreacle for the Peace Prize. First a really snarky one from the New York Post by Andrea Peyser:
October 13, 2007 — HERE'S a pop quiz:
Which failed U.S. pol itician has succeeded in regaining his global stature and impressing his lefty friends, winning the Nobel Peace Prize for creating alarmist works stuffed with half-truths, outright lies and political propaganda?
The answer: Jimmy Carter.
No, wait! Al Gore.
Actually, both.
It's official. Following his sweep of the Oscar and Emmy awards, Gore is taking home the liberal trifecta. The ex-vice prez and leading peddler of junk science has won the Nobel in the category of peace, and presumably science fiction, for his docu-comedy "An Inconvenient Truth."
Gore's career as a rock star for global warming capable of forcing small children and seniors to hide under their beds in fear has proved a more successful endeavor than politics. And he doesn't have to get up as early in the morning.
While my jury is still out on climate change - the planet has been warmer at other times in history - you may in your heart accept that the Earth is slowly cooking and still reject Gore as a warming nut.
Peyser goes on to roast the Nobel committee and their rapidly declining standards. Oddly the last sentence in the blockquote is exactly illustrated in another op-ed by Bjorn Lomborg in, of all places, The Boston Globe (that's two in one day - did someone put something in their water coolers?)
Likewise, Gore agonizes over the accelerated melting of ice in Greenland and what it means for the planet, but overlooks the IPCC's conclusion that, if sustained, the current rate of melting would add just 3 inches to the sea-level rise by the end of the century. Gore also takes no notice of research showing that Greenland's temperatures were higher in 1941 than they are today.
The politician-turned-moviemaker loses sleep over a predicted rise in heat-related deaths. There's another side of the story that's inconvenient to mention: rising temperatures will reduce the number of cold spells, which are a much bigger killer than heat. The best study shows that by 2050, heat will claim 400,000 more lives, but 1.8 million fewer will die because of cold. Indeed, according to the first complete survey of the economic effects of climate change for the world, global warming will actually save lives.
Gore has helped the world to worry. Unfortunately, our attention is diverted from where it matters. Climate change is not the only problem facing the globe.
Gore concentrates on his call for world leaders to cut CO2 emissions, yet there are other policies that would do much more for the planet. Over the coming century, developing nations will be increasingly dependent on food imports from developed countries. This is not primarily a result of global warming, but a consequence of more people and less arable land in the developing world.
The number of hungry people depends much less on climate than on demographics and income. Extremely expensive cuts in carbon emissions could mean more malnourished people. If our goal is to fight malnutrition, policies like getting nutrients to those who need them are 5,000 times more effective at saving lives than spending billions of dollars cutting carbon emissions.
Remember that Lomborg firmly believes in anthropogenic global warming. He just doesn't believe in Al Gore or the frantic, Chicken Littleish alarmism of the former VP. Lomborg supports helpful initiatives, not stupid and draconian kneecapping of economies.
Environment | Gaius Saturday, 13 October , 2007
By FedUp, Saturday, 13 October , 2007 @ 11:34 am
I remember when the Nobel Prize really stood for something - sadly, with people like Arafat, Carter and now Gore - that has all changed. Nust be part of the ‘normal’ decaying process… Sad…
By Uncle Pinky, Saturday, 13 October , 2007 @ 4:40 pm
It is also useful to remember how much Lomborg has suffered for his views. He’s taken mountains of abuse and has not yet punked out. I truly wish there were more like him, but he has provided an example to some of the more sane sceintists out there. He has also provided an obvious indictment of dishonest sceintific and academic journals.
By mockinbird, Saturday, 13 October , 2007 @ 5:13 pm
“Tipper, turn off the light when you leave a room.”
“Screw you Al, We own 30,000 shares of TVA.”