Friday, October 12, 2007

REALLY?

Okay, so I haven't seen the movie, and I only heard a quick blurb on the radio on my way in to work today, but what the ...... Al Gore wins a Nobel Prize for a MOVIE. I'm not sure anyone has ever won a Nobel Prize for a movie (don't have the time nor inclination to look it up) but my impression (remember how I started this post) is that this movie was/is somewhat Michael Moore-ish, twisting of facts and quotes out of context to meet one's pretext. I will acknowledge that there is global warming, and that we as a world need to be working on solutions...but, allow me to note that throughout history the average temperature of the earth/globe has modulated such that if we look at any short term data (a few hundred years) we will always see either an upward or a downward trend. I'll get off my soapbox before I present any other controversial ideas without taking more time this morning to do a bit of research (what I would expect of everyone, including myself, and hopefully this post will drive you in that direction to either confirm or change what you believe...do some reasearch). I really wouldn't want to confuse the issue with facts.

1 comment:

Tom said...

Now Stu, you know my political and social leanings, and you know they don't really line up with yours or John's. But first I'll say that I am not a big Michael Moore fan. He uses heavyhanded force-feeding filmmaking. And I'm not saying Gore is a either the highest expert on global warming or a brilliant director. But I think the biggest thing he did, which from looking at the Nobel web page (http://nobelprize.org) seems to be more what they are recognizing him for, is to make it a visible and hot topic for discussion, and presenting options and ideas to look at and research - just as you said. Yes there is a lot of data for people to absorb, yes there is conflicting data, but at least you and I are talking about it. Besides, name one other person this year, for ANYTHING, that deserves the Nobel peace prize instead.