Nobel laureates feel validated on climate change
POTSDAM, Germany–Sixty-two years after the victorious Allied leaders convened in this stately Prussian town to create the post-World War II world, 15 Nobel Prize laureates assembled here this week for another momentous task: saving the world from global warming.
It was only an academic symposium, and none of the scholars – including a Canadian Inuit woman in the running for a “green Nobel” – claimed to have a master plan to eradicate the threat of climate change. Still, there was a whiff of validation, if not victory, in the air.
“The scientific findings are clear: climate is changing, and it is a response to human activities,” said Mario Molina, a chemist who won the Nobel Prize in 1995 for being the first to posit that chlorofluorocarbons and similar chemicals could poke a hole in the ozone layer.
Molina was speaking during a week of Nobel announcements that the laureates at this meeting hoped would culminate today with the award of a “green” Peace Prize.
Among those rumoured as candidates are three climate-change evangelists: former U.S. vice president Al Gore; Sheila Watt-Cloutier, a Canadian who has warned about the threat to Arctic wildlife; and Rajendra Pachauri, an Indian scientist who is chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which assesses the risks of greenhouse gases for the United Nations.
Pachauri kicked things off with his panel’s latest findings, which he said ought to settle the debate about whether humans are making the planet dangerously warmer.
“People do raise this issue of what’s happening with the science, and whether the science is on board,” said Pachauri.
“I think that argument really should be over.”
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/265978
It is obvious the Science is SETTLED and the Scientific Debate has been over since before it even began.
There is no science that supports the Chicken Little Brigade so there is no science to debate.
This entire issue is based on extrapolated suppositions that are used to build models of virtual worlds that are only related to the real world in name.
Should we Debate the quality of a child’s fantasy game!
More of the same from losers with no real life, like young adults who refuse to stop partying and grow up.
They didn’t have a clue about the dreaded warmcold or wetdry phenomena in 2007, so how could the science have been settled?