Krugman has produced some serious academic research but is known primarily as a left-wing polemicist. He has written extensively, but a search of Amazon shows Krugman’s works are primarily textbooks that he co-authored (a very lucrative endeavor for professors but nothing that sheds any new light on any field) and titles aimed at the general public such as, “The Conscience of a Liberal.”

The Nobel Committee reported that the 1979 article, upon which they based their decision, had such earth-shattering revelations as “Krugman’s new theory was based on an assumption that consumers appreciate diversity in their consumption.” Well, duh. I thought everyone wanted to buy exactly the same thing as everyone else, over and over again. Thanks, Professor Krugman and the Nobel Committee for letting me know I was wrong about that.

Krugman is more accomplished than the run-of-the-mill economics professor but hardly Nobel Prize material.

Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize was also a homage to political correctness and popular junk science. Remember Gore’s film, “An Inconvenient Truth” (2006)? Some of the scenes of supposed global calamities turned out to be special effects lifted from Roland Emmerich’s global warming movie, “The Day After Tomorrow” (2004).

Emmerich’s latest project is the 2012 movie named, appropriately, “2012” coming out in November (link to trailer below). This one is going to be “Inconvenient Truth” and “Day After” on steroids. Al Gore’s movie just knocked off a few polar bears and a glacier or two. In “Day After” all Emmerich gave us was global warming causing a new ice age (go figure). This time around Emmerich destroys the entire planet. I guess he and Gore don’t think we got the message from their 2004 and 2006 attempts. But shouldn’t we always base public policy on movies? Some left-wing nut job is certainly going to get a Nobel Prize out of “2012.” It’s just as serious as the previous two Emmerich/Gore collaborations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz86TsGx3fc

Just looked up Moore. An amazing man. He should get the prize. Again, maybe he has already been nominated a few times, but you know, it’s like everything else today. You gotta hype everything, you gotta make noise get on the news, in magazines and papers. Name recognition has become the name of the game. Pretty sure that’s what got Gore the prize.

From what I read, Moore seems pretty satisfied with his retired life on the Pacific and not very likely to toot his own horn.

Send in his name!!!

Gordon Moore …

“The complexity for minimum component costs has increased at a rate of roughly a factor of two per year … Certainly over the short term this rate can be expected to continue, if not to increase. Over the longer term, the rate of increase is a bit more uncertain, although there is no reason to believe it will not remain nearly constant for at least 10 years. That means by 1975, the number of components per integrated circuit for minimum cost will be 65,000. I believe that such a large circuit can be built on a single wafer.”.

The literal first version of Moore’s Law. Gordon Moore would refine his law over the years.

He has been right for 44 years.

No other observation in my lifetime has had such a profound effect on society.

Gordon Moore for the Nobel Prize.

I mean, really, compare Moore to Gore.

“Climate change” IS real!!! Did you EVER expect the climate to be static? It never has been, what a revelation! Oh, and have you heard, “climate change” caused the earthquake/tsunami in the Pacific and is the reason that the Olympics are going to Rio, rather than Chicago. Pathetic!

Global Climate Change is real, and you can call me any name you like.

The problem here is not AlGore per se, but the looneys on the award committee who swallowed all this tripe to such an extent that they missed the opportunity to honor an actual hero during the last year of her life and instead decided to reward Man-Bear-Pig for foisting this chicken little charade on us. Gore created this hysteria, but the Nobel committee is fully responsible for leaping into their sychophantic hero-worship of someone remarkably undeserving of it.

My point is that “global warming” nutcases, you included, are willing to throw even a genuine humanitarian hero under the bus in order to advance the notion that impoverishing the human race is the proper alms to lay upon the altar of Gaia-worship. Whether this is preferable to the notion that abortion helps reduce global warming by reducing the number of people using carbon-emitting energy I’ll leave to someone else to handle, though. To me it’s equally appalling.

But the point remains that “global warming” acolytes are simply insane. Completely bonkers, out of their minds, wrap-em-in-straight-jackets nuts.

Well, why did she not win against:

# 2001 - United Nations, Kofi Annan
# 1994 - Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin
# 1989 - The 14th Dalai Lama
# 1988 - United Nations Peacekeeping Forces
# 1973 - Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho
# 1972 - The prize money for 1972 was allocated to the Main Fund
# 1967 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
# 1956 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
# 1955 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section

It seems like she lost out to the “General Fund” more than she lost out to Al Gore. And She AND others should be/should have been honored for her bravery.

You can say what you want about Global Climate Change, but it is a fact (Al Gore or not).

If you are just trying to attack Al Gore, find a real topic.

Irena Sendler, was overlooked for the award in favor of an anti-capitalist moron and his continuing rants in favor of the fiction of global warming.

Global temperatures have been dropping for 10 years after rising slightly for the previous 20 after dropping for the previous 20.

Are you trolls picking up on the pattern yet?

Sun spot activity indicates the temps will continue to drop for the next 10 years.

The myth of global warming is nothing but another attempt to expand government control of…everything.

I humbly request all you global warming, sky is falling types move to California and wait to fall into the Pacific.

FYI, the Norwegian Parliament appoints the Norwegian Nobel Commission. They receive a number of nominations, the highest number so far being 199.

As Pat writes, all nominations are secret and the nominators are told to keep their nominations secret. Consequently, there’s no way of knowing whether Irena Sendler has ever been nominated; she may have been nominated several times.

The Peace Prize comm. has been known to chose some real duds, like Arafat, for example, and Kissinger who I don’t feel did much for the world. Individuals are up against organizations like Doctors without Borders, the American Friends Service Commission, people in the pubic eye like Bishop Tutu, Martin Luther King Jr, Elie Wiesel and on and on.

Greg - If you feel so strongly about Irena Sendler, I suggest that you start a campaign to get her nominated for the Peace Prize. Send your nomination to Oslo and see what happens. Anybody is free to nominate anybody. You never know. Right now there aren’t many who are qualified for the honor IMHO.

In no way is Al Gore responsible for his nomination and, least of all, for coming out on top.

First off, I commend her for her bravery and courage that she stood up to what she saw as wrongdoing, and helped in what ever way she could. We need more people like that (although they are hard to find).

Now, are you blaming Al Gore, that the Nobel Committee decided he should get the award?
Are you blaiming the nominator for only nominating here once (although nominations are held secret for 50 years, so how to know how many times, or if ever she were nominated).
Are you blaming the committee that she did not get the award??

or are you just denying that there is global climate change?

What about Schindler or Sir Winton?