Gore: ‘flying rivers, rain bombs’

[Starlight]

He was poster boy, head populariser figure, which is why he got Nobel Peace Prize

I wasn't aware he'd been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, although frankly the Nobel Peace Prize is a bit of a joke. I see he got it jointly with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

[Tassman]

I wasn't aware he'd been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, although frankly the Nobel Peace Prize is a bit of a joke. I see he got it jointly with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Sadly I must agree with you given that Aung San Suu Kyi, also a recipient, has been presiding over the Myanmar genocide against the Rohingya people.

[Starlight]

Sadly I must agree with you given that Aung San Suu Kyi, also a recipient, has been presiding over the Myanmar genocide against the Rohingya people.

And Obama after being awarded it, managed to be bombing 7 countries simultaneously, including bombing another recipient of the prize, Doctors Without Borders.

[Cow Poke]

Because he is right about climate change and it irritates the hell out of them.

No, it's because he's a goofus who has been so incredibly wrong so frequently. He comes across as a snake oil salesman. But, he's your guy, so....

[Cow Poke]

I wasn't aware he'd been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, although frankly the Nobel Peace Prize is a bit of a joke. I see he got it jointly with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The extent to which the NPP is a joke was really brought home when it was awarded to Obama for doing ZILCH.

[One Bad Pig]

I wasn't aware he'd been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, although frankly the Nobel Peace Prize is a bit of a joke.

I agree with... Starlight AND Tassman on something?!?

*head esplodes*

[demi-conservative]

I wasn't aware he'd been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, although frankly the Nobel Peace Prize is a bit of a joke. I see he got it jointly with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Yes, we know progs have habit to give Peace Prize, then regret it.

So same for Al Gore, honor him for spreading 'sky is falling!!!!!', later pretend he was never important when he becomes embarassment.

[Tassman]

No, it's because he's a goofus who has been so incredibly wrong so frequently. He comes across as a snake oil salesman.

We're talking about Gore, "the former next president of the United States", not Trump.

[Cow Poke]

We're talking about Gore, "the former next president of the United States", not Trump.

Correct. Gore the con man - he's just much 'slicker' than Trump.

[Tassman]

Correct. Gore the con man - he's just much 'slicker' than Trump.

But Gore is right about climate change.

[Cow Poke]

But Gore is right about climate change.

But he's been wrong about so many things that he gives the deniers ammunition. He's a hypocrite to the max.

[rogue06]

But he's been wrong about so many things that he gives the deniers ammunition. He's a hypocrite to the max.

IMHO it is his habit of promoting over-the-top absolutely worst case scenarios imaginable as inevitable and imminent that is the biggest of his many problems

[Starlight]

IMHO it is his habit of promoting over-the-top absolutely worst case scenarios imaginable as inevitable and imminent that is the biggest of his many problems

I would say with an issue such as climate change, where the potential possibility of inaction followed by a worse-than-we-are-expecting case scenario exists, and where there are are no serious problems with over-reacting to the threat, that it is rational to over-hype.

It concerns me somewhat that scientists have a tendency to generate ~4 models of 'best case' scenario through to 'worst case' and then publicly push only their 'best case scenario estimates (i.e. ones that show the least dangers) in order to not look like alarmists. However, I relatively frequently hear comments from scientists researching the topic that actually climate change often appears to be having worse effects than even their worst case scenarios. I am usually generally extremely optimistic about the future of our society, but everything I know about this issue has me deeply deeply concerned... as a scientist myself I know people doing active research in this field and the things they tell me are not reassuring at all.

The utter morons who say effectively "climate change is all a hoax, let's put down the accelerator and drive straight at the nearest cliff" are putting our entire civilization in jeopardy.

[Cow Poke]

I would say with an issue such as climate change, where the potential possibility of inaction followed by a worse-than-we-are-expecting case scenario exists, and where there are are no serious problems with over-reacting to the threat, that it is rational to over-hype.

Perhaps in your society there's not an equivalent "boy who cried wolf" tale?

The utter morons who say effectively "climate change is all a hoax, let's put down the accelerator and drive straight at the nearest cliff" are putting our entire civilization in jeopardy.

I get it - you're giving an example of how extremely exaggerating you can be. Kinda like Gore.

[Starlight]

Perhaps in your society there's not an equivalent "boy who cried wolf" tale?

It doesn't seem to apply to this situation. If our society overreacts to the alarm and cuts emissions and transitions to renewables faster than strictly necessary, then what? Nothing bad happens.

The boy who cried wolf analogy would imply that in the future when climate change threatens to reoccur (why would it?) that society wouldn't believe the scientists the second time if climate change had been averted the first time. That seems silly.

I get it - you're giving an example of how extremely exaggerating you can be. Kinda like Gore.

I get it - you're giving us an example of a pathological person who's happy to drive our civilization straight at the nearest cliff because you apparently care nothing for your grandchildren or future generations and prefer to be smugly self-satisfied in your ignorance in the present.