Feb 16

As Glaciergate was breaking, I believe I was the first to call for the Nobel Committee to revoke Al Gore’s and the UN IPCC’s share Nobel Peace Prize, despite the fact that Nobel rules prohibit revocation of the Nobel Peace Prize. I said, “Screw it, set a new precedent!

Fast forward a few weeks (and a few more IPCC fill-in-the-blank-”gates”) and momentum seems to be building a bit more for revocation of Gore’s and the IPCC’s award:

1. This video surfaced on YouTube:

2. An on-line petition has started demanding to “Strip Al Gore and The UN IPCC of Their Nobel Prize and Award It Instead to The Much More Deserving Irena Sendler:

Al Gore and The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) shared a Nobel Peace Prize
in 2007. Since receiving the award, a UK court has ruled that An Inconvenient Truth, the work for which Al Gore received his half of the prize, contained nine factual errors.

Recently, it was discovered that the UN IPCC 2007 Report, the work for which the IPCC received its half of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, contained false information regarding the risk of glacier melt, species extinction, sea-level rise
and natural disaster in an effort to frighten the public and goad politicians into taking action. By signing this petition, you are sending a clear message that you wish for Al Gore and the UN IPCC to be stripped of their 2007 award.

In signing, you are also asking that the 2007 prize to Irena Sendler who risked her life daily during WWII to ultimately rescue more than 2,500 Jewish children from the Nazis.  Irena Sendler was among those up for the Prize in 2007 that the much less deserving Gore and IPCC won for political reasons.

3. The Donald has spoken:

Tycoon Donald Trump, citing the East Coast’s massive snowstorms, says former Vice President Al Gore should be stripped of his Nobel Peace Prize, according to the New York Post.

The paper reports that the billionaire told about 500 members of his Trump National Golf Club in Westchester, N.Y.:

With the coldest winter ever recorded, with snow setting record levels up and down the coast, the Nobel committee should take the Nobel Prize back from Al Gore.

Gore wants us to clean up our factories and plants in order to protect us from global warming, when China and other countries couldn’t care less. It would make us totally noncompetitive in the manufacturing world, and China, Japan and India are laughing at America’s stupidity.

When will the Nobel Committee take action and revoke this award which was buillt on an elaborate lie? Not until hell freezes over.

8 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Jan 23

Via Nobelprize.org’s FAQ:

Is it possible to revoke a Nobel Prize?

No, it is not possible according to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, § 10.

With the report today of a UN scientist’s frank admission that false data regarding Himalayan glaciers was used in the UN IPCC’s AR4, if there ever was a case for a Nobel Peace Prize to be revoked, this is it!

It’s time for the Nobel Committe to swallow their pride and set a new precedent by revoking the UN IPCC”s and Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize, and save some shred of what little credibility they have left.

18 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Dec 07

On the same day that the EPA is set to falsely accuse the atmosphere’s CO2 molecules of being an “endangerment”, I hereby unofficially nominate the humble CO2 molecule for the Nobel Peace Prize. Hey, it makes more sense than calling this beneficial trace gas an “endangerment”. In his own Nobel acceptance/lecture, Al Gore has gone so far as to call CO2 “global warming pollution”, and insisted that man’s emissions of it were akin to treating our atmosphere like an “open sewer”. He couldn’t be more wrong.

When it comes to molecules that are necessary for life to exist on earth, with the possible exception of H20, you’d be hard-pressed to find one more beneficial than good old carbon dioxide.

CO2 is good for plants:

Literally thousands of laboratory and field experiments have conclusively demonstrated that enriching the air with carbon dioxide stimulates the growth and development of nearly all plants. They have also revealed that higher-than-normal CO2 concentrations dramatically enhance the efficiency with which plants utilize water, sometimes as much as doubling it in response to a doubling of the air’s CO2 content. These CO2-induced improvements typically lead to the development of more extensive and active root systems, enabling plants to more thoroughly explore larger volumes of soil in search of the things they need. Consequently, even in soils lacking sufficient water and nutrients for good growth at today’s CO2 concentrations, plants exposed to the elevated atmospheric CO2 levels expected in the future generally show remarkable increases in vegetative productivity, which should enable them to successfully colonize low-rainfall areas that are presently too dry to support more than isolated patches of desert vegetation.

Elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 also enable plants to better withstand the growth-retarding effects of various environmental stresses, including soil salinity, air pollution, high and low air temperatures, and air-borne and soil-borne plant pathogens. In fact, atmospheric CO2 enrichment can actually mean the difference between life and death for vegetation growing in extremely stressful circumstances. In light of these facts, it is not surprising that Earth’s natural and managed ecosystems have already benefited immensely from the increase in atmospheric CO2 that has accompanied the progression of the Industrial Revolution; and they will further prosper from future CO2 increases.

Join us as we explore these and other important benefits that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations are bestowing on plants. Carbon dioxide emissions resulting from the burning of fossil fuels should not be feared; they are something to be celebrated!

CO2 is good for humans:

Continue reading »

60 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Jun 16

As we posted earlier today, the Tennessee Senate rejected a proposal to erect statues to honor two of the state’s Nobel Peace Prize winners, Al Gore and Cordell Hull.

The AP story has been updated to include spin blaming the Senate Republican’s “extremist, partisan dislike” of Al Gore for the failure of the proposal, and of course the AP couldn’t resist the urge to promote Hull to victim status:

“I’m embarrassed for our state that we have decided not to honor two individuals who won just about the most prestigious prize in the world because of extremist, partisan dislike of one person,” said [Democratic Sen. Andy] Berke.

But, many of the opponents said logically that statues should only be for people that have assumed room temperature:

Several opponents said they voted against the measure because it breaks with the current practice of only honoring people once they have died.

Other opponents said that they opposed the proposal because it wasn’t all-inclusive:

Sen. Jim Tracy, R-Shelbyville, said he opposed the measure because it would have excluded Nobel laureates in other fields, like Murfreesboro native James M. Buchanan Jr. who won the award for economics in 1986.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Be the first to like.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
Jun 16

Yesterday, Newsbusters asked, “Will Widespread Global Cooling Reports Freeze Al Gore Media Credibility?” Perhaps so.  AP:

NASHVILLE – Senate Republicans have rejected a resolution urging the erection on Tennessee Capitol grounds of statues to honor the state’s two Nobel Peace Prize winners, Al Gore and Cordell Hull.

The Senate voted 15-14 on the resolution sponsored by Democratic Sen. Andy Berke of Chattanooga, but measures need at least 17 votes to pass. The House earlier passed the resolution unanimously.

Methinks this is a more apt statue of Al Gore anyway…

Frozen Al Gore

Hat tip: Climate Change Fraud

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Be the first to like.

Possibly Related Posts:


Share
Tagged with:
preload preload preload