STOCKHOLM, Oct. 15, 2007
Three Americans Win Nobel Economics Prize
Leonid Hurwicz, Eric S. Maskin, Roger B. Myerson Helped Explain Why Markets Work
-
Nobel Prize-winning American economists Leonid Hurwicz, Eric S. Maskin and Roger B. Myerson. (AP)
-
Interactive Eye On The Economy In-depth features on U.S. markets, taxes, employment and the Federal Reserve.
-
Photos Nobel Prize in Pictures Images from the awards for the world's best in science, economics, literature and peacemaking
The three researchers "laid the foundations of mechanism design theory," which plays a central role in contemporary economics and political science, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said.
The research helps explain decision-making processes involved in economic transactions determining, for example, what insurance polices will provide the best coverage without inviting misuse, the academy said. It also has applications in job markets and voting procedures, according to academic literature.
"Mechanism design theory, initiated by Leonid Hurwicz and further developed by Eric Maskin and Roger Myerson, has greatly enhanced our understanding of optimal allocation mechanisms," the academy said.
By accounting for individuals' incentives and private information, their theory lets economists, governments and businesses "distinguish situations in which markets work well from those in which they do not," the academy said in its citation.
"My ability to work with people in my field to try to understand the economy better and to understand the problems that face our society, I hope that will be enhanced by this," Myerson told CBS Radio News.
Myerson, 56, has been at University of Chicago since 2001. He previously worked at Northwestern's Kellogg School of Management.
"There were a lot of us working in this area in the late 1970s," he told The Associated Press, describing his work as investigating "How does information get used in society to allocate resources?"
He added, "I really didn't expect it. There were times when other people said I was on the short list but as time passed and nothing happened I didn't expect the recognition would come because people who were familiar with my work were slowly dying off."
Quote
"It is a huge honor, I'm just overwhelmed to have my name on that list," he told Sweden's TV4 network.It is a huge honor, I'm just overwhelmed to have my name on that list.
Roger B. MyersonHurwicz, 90, who was born in Moscow, is an emeritus professor of economics at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. Maskin, 56, is professor at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, N.J.
The economics award is not one of the original Nobel Prizes. It was created in 1968 by the Swedish central bank in Nobel's memory.
Last year American Edmund S. Phelps won the prize for explaining the relationship between inflation and unemployment, work that has had a profound impact on macroeconomic policy.
Nobel Prize winners receive $1.5 million, a gold medal and diploma from the Swedish king on Dec. 10, the anniversary of Nobel's death in 1896.
The other prizes were announced last week, with the Nobel Prize in medicine going to Americans Mario R. Capecchi and Oliver Smithies, and Briton Sir Martin J. Evans, for groundbreaking discoveries that led to a powerful technique for manipulating mouse genes.
France's Albert Fert and German Peter Gruenberg won the physics award for discovering a phenomenon that enables computers and digital music players to store reams of data on ever-shrinking hard disks.
Gerhard Ertl of Germany won the chemistry prize for studies of chemical reactions on solid surfaces, which are key to understanding such questions as why the ozone layer is thinning.
Britain's Doris Lessing won the literature prize, and former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for their efforts to spread awareness of man-made climate change.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Michelle Obama tells how her role as the First Lady has changed her perspective.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 21 Commentsit is merely an unproven theory
peoples opinions are not facts
Posted by terrorislam1 at 05:09 PM : Oct 15, 2007
Exactly what I said. Opinions are not facts. That''s why the mainstream media isn''t reporting on one crack pot''s goofy theories.
a consensus is proof of nothing
it is merely an unproven theory
peoples opinions are not facts
Scientific consensus is the collective judgment, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of science at a ...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Scientific+consensus&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
why does the above get ZERO media coverage????
Posted by badaxmofo at 03:55 PM : Oct 15, 2007
Because you''re an idiot. Read the last line, from the first paragraph of the article:
"Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet''s recent climate changes have a natural%u2014and not a human-induced%u2014cause, according to one scientist''s controversial theory."
Do you see the word "controversial"?
Then later in the article it says:
"Abdussamatov''s work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists."
In other words, one lunatic doesn''t make a iron clad fact. That''s why it hasn''t been reported on by the major news outlets. Now if he can get some proof of this crazy theory, then I bet he''d get some coverage.
I mean anyone that can make a pallet of cash worth $9 billion dollars just vanish, without so much as a single question from the Republican led Congress, (at the time), is either an economic, mathematical genius or David Copperfield.
stop believing in scientist funded by the left wing socialist/communist,,,
Man is too weak to permanently affect nature.....
Who is impious enough to believe that Earth''s contours are permanent? Our eyes are simply too slow to see the shift of tectonic plates that has raised the Himalayas and is dangling Los Angeles over an unstable fault. I began "Sexual Personae" (parodying the New Testament): "In the beginning was nature." And nature will survive us all. Man is too weak to permanently affect nature, which includes infinitely more than this tiny globe.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/04/11/global_warming/index4.html
Man is too weak to permanently affect nature.....
However, I am a skeptic about what is currently called global warming. I have been highly suspicious for years about the political agenda that has slowly accrued around this issue. As a lapsed Catholic, I detest dogma in any area. Too many of my fellow Democrats seem peculiarly credulous at the moment, as if, having ground down organized religion into nonjudgmental, feel-good therapy, they are hungry for visions of apocalypse. From my perspective, virtually all of the major claims about global warming and its causes still remain to be proved.
Climate change, keyed to solar cycles, is built into Earth''s system. Cooling and warming will go on forever. Slowly rising sea levels will at some point doubtless flood lower Manhattan and seaside houses everywhere from Cape Cod to Florida -- as happened to Native American encampments on those very shores. Human habitation is always fragile and provisional. People will migrate for the hills, as they have always done.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/04/11/global_warming/index4.html
Arrhenius was merely expressing a view that was firmly entrenched in the collective consciousness of the day: warm times are good times; cold times are bad.
During the so-called Medieval Warm Period between about 900 and 1300 A.D., for example, the Vikings raised livestock on Greenland and sailed to North America. New cities were built all across Europe, and the continent''s population grew from 30 million to 80 million.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,481684,00.html
How bad is climate change really? Are catastrophic floods and terrible droughts headed our way? Despite widespread fears of a greenhouse hell, the latest computer simulations are delivering far less dramatic predictions about tomorrow''s climate.
Svante Arrhenius, the father of the greenhouse effect, would be called a heretic today. Far from issuing the sort of dire predictions about climate change which are common nowadays, the Swedish physicist dared to predict a paradise on earth for humans when he announced, in April 1896, that temperatures were rising -- and that it would be a blessing for all.
Arrhenius, who later won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, calculated that the release of carbon dioxide -- or carbonic acid as it was then known -- through burning coal, oil and natural gas would lead to a significant rise in temperatures worldwide. But, he argued, "by the influence of the increasing percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere, we may hope to enjoy ages with more equable and better climates," potentially making poor harvests and famine a thing of the past.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,481684,00.html
Growing Number of Scientists Convert to Skeptics After Reviewing New Research
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=927b9303-802a-23ad-494b-dccb00b51a12&Region_id=&Issue_id=
ABC buys gobal warming doco
A CONTROVERSIAL British documentary which claims global warming is a lie will be shown by the ABC.
The Great Global Warming Swindle, to be aired by the national broadcaster in July, is the ideological opposite to Al Gore''s acclaimed movie An Inconvenient Truth.
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,23663,21779177-10388,00.html
NASA''s Top Official Questions Global Warming
NASA Administrator Michael Griffin Questions Need to Combat Warming
"To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth''s climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn''t change," Griffin said. "I guess I would ask which human beings %u2014 where and when %u2014 are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that''s a rather arrogant position for people to take."
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3229696&page=1
The fact that science is many years away from properly understanding global climate doesn''t seem to bother our leaders at all. Inviting testimony only from those who don''t question political orthodoxy on the issue, parliamentarians are charging ahead with the impossible and expensive goal of "stopping global climate change." Liberal MP Ralph Goodale''s June 11 House of Commons assertion that Parliament should have "a real good discussion about the potential for carbon capture and sequestration in dealing with carbon dioxide, which has tremendous potential for improving the climate, not only here in Canada but around the world," would be humorous were he, and even the current government, not deadly serious about devoting vast resources to this hopeless crusade.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/comment/story.html?id=597d0677-2a05-47b4-b34f-b84068db11f4&p=4
A new analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that more than 500 scientists have published evidence refuting at least one element of current man-made global warming scares. More than 300 of the scientists found evidence that 1) a natural moderate 1,500-year climate cycle has produced more than a dozen global warmings similar to ours since the last Ice Age and/or that 2) our Modern Warming is linked strongly to variations in the sun''s irradiance. "This data and the list of scientists make a mockery of recent claims that a scientific consensus blames humans as the primary cause of global temperature increases since 1850," said Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Dennis Avery.
Other researchers found evidence that 3) sea levels are failing to rise importantly; 4) that our storms and droughts are becoming fewer and milder with this warming as they did during previous global warmings; 5) that human deaths will be reduced with warming because cold kills twice as many people as heat; and 6) that corals, trees, birds, mammals, and butterflies are adapting well to the routine reality of changing climate.
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,176495.shtml
SURVEY: LESS THAN HALF OF ALL PUBLISHED SCIENTISTS ENDORSE GLOBAL WARMING THEORY; COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY OF PUBLISHED CLIMATE RESEARCH REVEALS CHANGING VIEWPOINTS
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=b35c36a3-802a-23ad-46ec-6880767e7966
AN INCONVENIANT DEBATE,,, LOL
Chilly reception for debate offer
http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/589551,CST-EDT-HUNT05.article
CNN Meteorologist: %u2018Definitely Some Inaccuracies%u2019 in Gore Film
CNN Meteorologist Rob Marciano clapped his hands and exclaimed, "Finally," in response to a report that a British judge might ban the movie "An Inconvenient Truth" from UK schools because, according to "American Morning," "it is politically biased and contains scientific inaccuracies."
http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/cnn-meteorologist-definitely-some-inaccuracies-gore-film.html
Chilly reception for debate offer
http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/589551,CST-EDT-HUNT05.article
A controversial documentary on climate change which has been sent to thousands of schools has been criticised by a High Court judge for being ''alarmist'' and ''exaggerated''.
Mr Justice Burton said former US vice-president Al Gore''s film, An Inconvenient Truth, was ''one-sided'' and would breach education rules unless accompanied by a warning.
Despite winning lavish praise from the environmental lobby and an Oscar from the film industry, Mr Gore''s documentary was found to contain ''nine scientific errors'' by the judge.
These inconvenient untruths included the claim that the snows on Mount Kilimanjaro were disapearing and solely due to the global warming and that sea levels will rise up to 20 feet in the near future.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23416151-details/Judge+attacks nine errors in Al Gore''s ''alarmist'' climate change film/article.do
there has been climate change over the life of the planet with the vast majority of the time there was no permanent ice on earth.
only in relatively recent earth history has there been periods of warming and periods of cooling. all ice ages have occurred less than one billion years ago.
climate change is a fact, always has been, adapt or die like the dinosaurs, use the money to move to higher ground.
When have Ice Ages occurred?
http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/when_ice_ages.html
Ice Ages
http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/
it is merely an unproven theory
peoples opinions are not facts
Former Science Mag Editor Speaks Out Against Global Warming Hysteria
Calder wonderfully explained how a ten percent uncertainty in science is not something to be easily dismissed:
The small print explains %u201Cvery likely%u201D as meaning that the experts who made the judgment felt 90% sure about it. Older readers may recall a press conference at Harwell in 1958 when Sir John Cockcroft, Britain%u2019s top nuclear physicist, said he was 90% certain that his lads had achieved controlled nuclear fusion. It turned out that he was wrong. More positively, a 10% uncertainty in any theory is a wide open breach for any latterday Galileo or Einstein to storm through with a better idea. That is how science really works.
http://newsbusters.org/node/10756
it is merely an unproven theory
peoples opinions are not facts
Former Science Mag Editor Speaks Out Against Global Warming Hysteria
Nigel Calder is probably not a household name in America, as he used to be the editor of the British science magazine New Scientist, and is more recently an author and BBC screenwriter. With that as pretext, he wrote a column for the Sunday Times in which he absolutely slammed the recent hysteria and junk science surrounding anthropogenic global warming
When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works. We were treated to another dose of it recently when the experts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued the Summary for Policymakers that puts the political spin on an unfinished scientific dossier on climate change due for publication in a few months%u2019 time. They declared that most of the rise in temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to man-made greenhouse gases.
http://newsbusters.org/node/10756
you obviously know nothing of the political propoganda bias of the nobel prize awards, ie the fix is in
all one has to do is look at the previous winners and those nominated to see how meaningless this award is
al bore is in good company, right where he belongs, with a terrorist arafat, a communist gorbachev, a criminal kofi annan and a certifiable dimwit dimmy carter LOL
. . .
His comments came on the same day that the Nobel committee honoured Mr Gore for his work in support of the link between humans and global warming.
"We''''re brainwashing our children," said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. "They''''re going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It''''s ridiculous."
Posted by terrorislam1
isn''t this just like a neocon conservative republican?
totally misses the point of the nobel peace prize. sorry bucko, but this was not the academy awards. al gore rightfully won the award for bringing the cause of global warming to the forefront. this is foreign to republicans who want to dismiss decades of global warming and environmental regulations and science. al gore won the award as a way of recognizing the need to bring global warming and the environment despite offical american gwb policy that this is not a problem. this did not have anything to do with the movie "an inconvenient truth".
do you get the point now neocon? if your politics wouldn''t get in the way, you would see that republicans before gwb actually understood the environmental science and agreed with kyoto accords.
Gore gets a cold shoulder
ONE of the world''s foremost meteorologists has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don''t understand how the atmosphere works".
Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth.
His comments came on the same day that the Nobel committee honoured Mr Gore for his work in support of the link between humans and global warming.
"We''re brainwashing our children," said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. "They''re going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It''s ridiculous."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/gore-gets-a-cold-shoulder/2007/10/13/1191696238792.html
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 21 Comments